CTSurvivor
Regular Member
Yea, I have seen that soon nonsense turn into months. Did you FOI the info giving them a deadline or was it just an informal request?
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
visited DESPP in respect to their new registration/declaration forms & Issues
- Thread starter davidmcbeth
- Start date
Yea, I have seen that soon nonsense turn into months. Did you FOI the info giving them a deadline or was it just an informal request?
davidmcbeth
Banned
A formal request ... got my copy file stamped at their HQ .. you cannot give a deadline ... but if you think that they are dragging their feet, you can file a complaint before the freedom of information commission (which usually takes 10-12 mos. to puke out a decision)
davidmcbeth
Banned
Well, I got no response (other than a run around if you want to call that a response 
) from DESPP ... so I stopped off at Rep. Sampson's office today and inquired if they might be able to a response to my queries. The aide to the Rep. said that everyone had the same questions as I did and will forward the queries to DESPP.
The aide said that DESPP does not have to respond and I disagreed ... DESPP should answer any question to aide in a citizen in compliance with the law. The aide said that they still might not respond. I said then I'll take further action if they do not respond to the Rep. inquiry.
So the aide took it in stride and said that an answer, if any, should be known by the end of next week.
) from DESPP ... so I stopped off at Rep. Sampson's office today and inquired if they might be able to a response to my queries. The aide to the Rep. said that everyone had the same questions as I did and will forward the queries to DESPP.The aide said that DESPP does not have to respond and I disagreed ... DESPP should answer any question to aide in a citizen in compliance with the law. The aide said that they still might not respond. I said then I'll take further action if they do not respond to the Rep. inquiry.
So the aide took it in stride and said that an answer, if any, should be known by the end of next week.
Avidmind
New member
Public Act 13-3- Registering "Assault Weapons'
I just got off the phone with the CT DESPP, the lady I spoke to confirmed that the Social Security number is optional and leaving it blank is okay. I had other questions about the form; - she suggested I contact the legislature about them, her implication was that the form and questions were created by politicians and not the DESPP. I went to review the act, it seems that most of the questions including the social security one were generated by the DESPP, so they are mis-characterizing their own product. Here is the relevant part in the act "Sec. 28. Section 53-202d of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective from passage)4) The certificate of possession shall contain a description of the firearm that identifies it uniquely, including all identification marks, the full name, address, date of birth and thumbprint of the owner, and any other information as the department may deem appropriate.
As you can see the act asks for little (relatively), the DESPP have added social security, home telephone number, sex, height, weight, operator license number and importer.
I just got off the phone with the CT DESPP, the lady I spoke to confirmed that the Social Security number is optional and leaving it blank is okay. I had other questions about the form; - she suggested I contact the legislature about them, her implication was that the form and questions were created by politicians and not the DESPP. I went to review the act, it seems that most of the questions including the social security one were generated by the DESPP, so they are mis-characterizing their own product. Here is the relevant part in the act "Sec. 28. Section 53-202d of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective from passage)
4) The certificate of possession shall contain a description of the firearm that identifies it uniquely, including all identification marks, the full name, address, date of birth and thumbprint of the owner, and any other information as the department may deem appropriate.As you can see the act asks for little (relatively), the DESPP have added social security, home telephone number, sex, height, weight, operator license number and importer.
Doesn't the bolded phrase above cover that?I just got off the phone with the CT DESPP, the lady I spoke to confirmed that the Social Security number is optional and leaving it blank is okay. I had other questions about the form; - she suggested I contact the legislature about them, her implication was that the form and questions were created by politicians and not the DESPP. I went to review the act, it seems that most of the questions including the social security one were generated by the DESPP, so they are mis-characterizing their own product. Here is the relevant part in the act "Sec. 28. Section 53-202d of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective from passage)
As you can see the act asks for little (relatively), the DESPP have added social security, home telephone number, sex, height, weight, operator license number and importer.
Rich B
Regular Member
davidmcbeth
Banned
Well, the question is what is mandatory and what is not. Courts have ruled that agencies can ask for almost any information but it does not mean that all the information is mandatory (contrary to what DESPP thinks) to complete.
And recently DESPP has issued out directives that indicate that disclosure of detailed information, such as that which they are seeking in their forms, would create a safety risk to those that disclose. We certainly have the right to own various magazines so the question becomes: how much, if any, detailed information can they require?
The first violation regarding mag. declarations is only an infraction. Possibly a good case to push to the courts as the penalty is almost nothing.