Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Connecticut Carry - Press Release - DESPP attempts to mislead state legislators

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

    Connecticut Carry - Press Release - DESPP attempts to mislead state legislators

    From: http://ctcarry.com/News/Release/1e47...8-308b40850b43

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

    DESPP attempts to mislead state legislators to justify unlawful collection policies

    Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection attempts to get bill passed to make their unlawful behavior lawful

    Connecticut, June 4th, 2013:

    In their 2013 ‘Legislative package’, the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection set out to mislead the state legislature in an attempt to make their unlawful collection of background check fees lawful.

    The ‘AAC Fees Charged for Criminal History Background Checks’ proposal stated in part:

    This statutory change would create a new and appropriate revenue stream by charging for individuals in the private sector that currently do not pay any state fees for criminal history background checks performed by the agency’s State Police Bureau of Investigation

    In fact, the DESPP has been collecting this fee since October 1, 2009. The DESPP, as well as all local issuing authorities in the state received a Cease and Desist order for this unlawful practice in April 2012. A lawsuit was filed in May of 2013.

    The same proposal went on:

    Other changes will delete unnecessary and misleading language from the fee structure for criminal history background checks.
    Except that the language to be ‘deleted’ is actually additional language which instead of exempting local police departments and municipalities from background check fees, it changes that to only apply if the requesting agency is requesting the background check for employment purposes. This specifically targets the only other main reason why someone would get a background check fee through a local police department: Pistol permits. And it is a fee that DESPP has collected over $1 million of since they unlawfully started collecting it on October 1, 2009.


    This misleading and dishonest proposal resulted in Senate Bill 969.

    Connecticut Carry urges the legislature to condemn the dishonest and unlawful actions of the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection and urge them to discontinue their collections of such fees.

    Connecticut Carry will continue to fight these fees using the courts and whatever other lawful means they possess.

    More information on this issue can be found on http://ctcarry.com/BackgroundCheckFee/Background

    The DESPP proposal can be found here: http://www.ct.gov/opm/lib/opm/budget...protection.pdf

    Senate Bill 969 can be found here: http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillsta...hich_year=2013

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

    Failed legislation

    With the close of the 2013 legislative session, Senate Bill 969 failed to become law, leaving NO LAW or authorization for local Issuing Authorities or The Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection to demand a fee from Temporary State Pistol Permit Applicants.

    The case filed has been transferred from State to Federal Court.

    More will follow as it is received.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Peruta View Post
    With the close of the 2013 legislative session, Senate Bill 969 failed to become law, leaving NO LAW or authorization for local Issuing Authorities or The Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection to demand a fee from Temporary State Pistol Permit Applicants.

    The case filed has been transferred from State to Federal Court.

    More will follow as it is received.

    Who moved it to federal ... was any substitution of defendants done if it was the defendants?

    Federal court may take longer but federal judges don't like playing around during discovery either like the hide and seek game in state courts. So a plaintiff actually can fare better in federal court with some cases; I think that this case may be one that will have a better shot at a fair hearing in getting evidence through discovery to support punitive damages.


    Only thing I don't like about federal courts is that if you want to view the case filings for free you have to go to that specific courthouse. Pacer is everywhere but it costs. In state filings you can go to any state courthouse and look at filings for nothing. And I'm cheap cheap cheap lol
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 06-06-2013 at 08:54 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Torrington Fees Collected Since 10.01.2009

    Informaiton received today.

    The Town of Torrington today released the following information about the number of Temporary State Pistol Permits issued by her department:

    Maureen from Torrington Police Department called to give information

    01/01/2009 to Present 786 permits have been issued


    786 Temporary Permits issued X $50.00 in unlawfull fees = $39,300.00

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    The Hartford Courant has written about the $50.00 fee issue

    To everyone who has paid the unlawful $50.00 fee since October 1, 2009, here is the link.

    http://www.courant.com/news/breaking...,4255121.story

    If you are one of those who paid the unlawful fee, give Attorney Rachel Baird credit for addressing the $50.00 issue that the State did now want to deal with.

Posting Permissions

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