CHP Renewal Norfolk

My husband and I submitted our renewals by mail about a week ago. Someone from the Norfolk Circuit Court called him several days later requesting proof of competency and a copy of his ID. He informed them that the applications were renewals and that according to the law competency did not expire and proof was not needed for renewal. Now I have someone from the police department calling me requesting I come down and give them a copy of my identification.

I have looked at the application, the Norfolk Circuit Court page regarding CHPs and the State Police page and can find no where that says we need to send in a copy of our ID.

Can anyone tell me if ID is required for a renewal?

You should not need an ID for renewal, OR for a first application, in fact. You may need to provide an ID to the Notary Public, if they do not personally know you.

Your decision on how to respond depends on how much trouble you are willing to endure. If you want to help the community, then you could give them only what is required by law, and then force them to deny your permit, and follow the process from there. If you don't want to take the time and trouble, then you will probably have to give them everything they ask for and they will continue to do it wrong.

I was able to successfully convince my local clerk on the ID requirement by walking them through the worst case scenario: What happens if John Doe submits Jim Smith's application? Nothing. The background check would be conducted on the name on the application, and the permit would still be mailed to the address on the application, and the person who possesses it would need to have a government issued photo ID in order to "use" it. Confirming the ID at the time of submission does not add anything to the process whatsoever.

TFred

ETA: By the way, THREE posts in almost FIVE years! That's some heavy duty lurking there!!

This really gets my goat, how the system will hold us to the letter (or even just their mis-application) of their abitrary, unConstitutional laws upon jeopardy of our arrest, legal costs, fines, incarceration, life long confiscation of firearms, and loss of voting rights, despite having no malice or having created a victim; but they themselves can't stick to a simple few sections on how to process an application.:banghead:

Norfolk Circuit Court Clerk’s Office
Concealed Weapons Permits ... lol, should read Concealed Handgun Permit

• Bring the completed application to the Norfolk Circuit Clerk’s Office along with the fee.
  § 18.2-308.02,A. Any person 21 years of age or older may apply in writing to the clerk of the circuit court of the county or city in which he resides
  ​
• Upon completion and issuance of the concealed carry permit, you may either come into the Clerk's Office to pick it up, or we can mail it to the address on the application.
  § 18.2-308.04,C. The court shall issue the permit via United States mail and notify the State Police of the issuance of the permit within 45 days of receipt of the completed application unless it is determined that the applicant is disqualified.
  ​

NORFOLK CIRCUIT COURT CIVIL FEE SCHEDULE

• Concealed Handgun Permit - Lost $7.00
  § 18.2-308.011,B. The clerk of a circuit court that issued a valid concealed handgun permit shall, upon submission of a notarized statement by the permit holder that the permit was lost or destroyed, issue a replacement permit. The replacement permit shall have the same expiration date as the permit that was lost or destroyed. The clerk shall issue the replacement permit within 10 business days of receiving the notarized statement, and may charge a fee not to exceed $5.
  ​
• Concealed Handgun Permit Replacement - Address Change $12.00
  § 18.2-308.011,A. The clerk of a circuit court that issued a valid concealed handgun permit shall, upon presentation of the valid permit and proof of a new address of residence by the permit holder, issue a replacement permit specifying the permit holder's new address. The clerk of court shall forward the permit holder's new address of residence to the State Police. The State Police may charge a fee not to exceed $5, and the clerk of court issuing the replacement permit may charge a fee not to exceed $5. The total amount assessed for processing a replacement permit pursuant to this subsection shall not exceed $10, with such fees to be paid in one sum to the person who receives the information for the replacement permit.
  ​

Stacy said:

My husband and I submitted our renewals by mail about a week ago. Someone from the Norfolk Circuit Court called him several days later requesting proof of competency and a copy of his ID.

Click to expand...

Stacy said:

Now I have someone from the police department calling me requesting I come down and give them a copy of my identification.

Click to expand...

What's the matter with you? Aren't you a good citizen. You need that permit and if you don't obey their demands you can just go to court and holler fish.
The price of selling your soul.:uhoh:

:banana:

peter nap said:

What's the matter with you? Aren't you a good citizen. You need that permit and if you don't obey their demands you can just go to court and holler fish.
The price of selling your soul.:uhoh:

:banana:

Click to expand...

As if open carrying doesn't have its own sets of chains, but free.
$50 is the price to unlock some of those shackles.
None of it should be in force.

ChristCrusader said:

As if open carrying doesn't have its own sets of chains, but free.
$50 is the price to unlock some of those shackles.
None of it should be in force.

Click to expand...

And just what chains and shackles might that be?

peter nap said:

And just what chains and shackles might that be?

Click to expand...

every infringement upon your uninfringable right to carry of course, a few of which are for sale back @$50. I hate it, but miss the $50 less than I missed the rights.

ChristCrusader said:

every infringement upon your uninfringable right to carry of course, a few of which are for sale back @$50. I hate it, but miss the $50 less than I missed the rights.

Click to expand...

You aren't related to David McBeth are you?:lol:

Since you're a crusader for Christ...maybe this will help:

When you want to do anything you please and get to locked property owned by Satin, you get obsessive.
When you get obsessive you search for ways to get in the locked property.
When you search for ways to get into the locked property.... you ask Satin for permission who lives by the deal.
When you ask Satin for permission he agrees to make a deal for title to your soul.
When you give him title to your soul, you get to go where you please but your head spins and you puke green pea soup.

Don't have a spinning head and puke green pea soup....pick the damn lock instead!

:uhoh:

peter nap said:

You aren't related to David McBeth are you?:lol:

Since you're a crusader for Christ...maybe this will help:

When you want to do anything you please and get to locked property owned by Satin, you get obsessive.
When you get obsessive you search for ways to get in the locked property.
When you search for ways to get into the locked property.... you ask Satin for permission who lives by the deal.
When you ask Satin for permission he agrees to make a deal for title to your soul.
When you give him title to your soul, you get to go where you please but your head spins and you puke green pea soup.

Don't have a spinning head and puke green pea soup....pick the damn lock instead!

:uhoh:

Click to expand...

I have the key... US2A and VA Art1, Sect13... but by the time I got around to wanting in, because they started talking about barring the doors altogether, I've found 3/4 of the doors' locks had been changed.

I bought my $50 access card that gets me into a few more rooms, and lets me do more things in other rooms.
I haven't "sold my soul". I aquiesced to a compromise someone(s) before me negotiated, in order to access as many options as possible (some particularly affect specific circumstances in my and/or my family's daily life).
I'm enraged at the terms of the compromises people who've been awake have allowed to pass; but I'm no better for having slept and probably agreed with them myself at the time, being a brainwashed hoplophobe like I was.
I'm not satisfied with CHP's. But I bought one. Not satisfied with that though, I intend to lobby for more restored, FREE liberties; restoration of US2A and VA Art1 Sect13, the ejection of traitorous politicians, and the education of the electorate to help achieve it.
I intend to resist even a 50 cent postage or a sase past what the law has allowed to be charged for a CHP.

I'm not disparaging OC. I didn't perceive this to be an anti-CC forum or thread.
I assumed we could be on the same team.
If I'm offending more protocol of an established clique's little circle of single mindedness, then be integrous enough about it to say up front in the rules of the forum. Instead if you're willing to compare understandings of keeping and bearing, then there's benefit for all.
But instead, as soon as enough people get tired of reading another's opinions, y'all close the thread. Not stop reading, unsubscribe to updates, and let whomever wants to continue keep going.
I'm not upset that you're challenging me. That's good and welcome. Because I want to be challenged to test the validity of my perception. I want to be prepared with a reasoned answer when i speak to a hoplophobic politician. I want to correct my perception if I'm shown to be off through education or philosophical enlightening.
It sounds like you're disparaging mcbeth personally, just because he sees things differently.
I can ignore that, but when the modus operandi is to ultimately close threads, then it's a waste of time ending in insulting rudeness from those who auspiciously created a forum for discussion.
There are a lot of us new gun owners and carriers... new to the politics of it as well. You can stay comfortably in your seats, from where you've let all these encroachments steal our liberties bite by bite, and mock the people who see it with fresh eyes and are astounded and want to push back, but I subsequently find you working more for the ones who'd keep you in chains than the ones outraged and wanting to rage against the machine.
You guys have shown your colors.
enjoy...

ChristCrusader said:

I'm not disparaging OC. I didn't perceive this to be an anti-CC forum or thread.

It isn't, it's an OC Board...Read the rules

It sounds like you're disparaging mcbeth personally, just because he sees things differently.

Well, no, not because he sees things differently but we'll keep the real reason secret.

I can ignore that, but when the modus operandi is to ultimately close threads, then it's a waste of time ending in insulting rudeness from those who
You guys have shown your colors.
enjoy...

That's interesting. I usually respond to stupid posts and people with insulting and equally stupid posts....And just so you don't run out of fingers to count with...You Guys so far has consisted of me. I'm less forgiving than others. I've watched this board which was dedicated to open carry, gradually degenerate to a haven for CHiPpers, Trolls and now Crusaders. But if your post means you're going away.....don't let the Devils door hit you on the backsides.

Click to expand...

.......

Now you say your going to fight for change. Tough talk but I was at the General Assembly nearly every day this session and know most of the activists....I don't recall seeing you. What I do see you doing is making long, boring, argumentative threads about a subject you are poorly informed about. If you're going to change things you have to take the fight to the enemy.

In my experience, threads normally get locked when they are no longer on point, are spinning in circles, have become argumentative for the sake of arguing, or otherwise have outlived their usefulness. One has to wonder about folks who want such pointlessness to continue and so carry it into other threads. In fact, I feel a lock coming on.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Stacy said:

My husband and I submitted our renewals by mail about a week ago. Someone from the Norfolk Circuit Court called him several days later requesting proof of competency and a copy of his ID. He informed them that the applications were renewals and that according to the law competency did not expire and proof was not needed for renewal. Now I have someone from the police department calling me requesting I come down and give them a copy of my identification.

I have looked at the application, the Norfolk Circuit Court page regarding CHPs and the State Police page and can find no where that says we need to send in a copy of our ID.

Can anyone tell me if ID is required for a renewal?

Click to expand...

You are correct that no ID can be demanded for a CHP application, that proof of training does not expire, and that an application by a person who has held a CHP before may be submitted by mail.

This is the way you can squeeze the Clerk into fixing the policy - has worked in other circuit courts.

But the stature still requires proof of training, e.g., copy of a previously issued CHP.

Recommend you send a letter to the Clerk containing copies of your previous CHPs, note nicely that these are considered "proof of training" under the statute, and politely remind the Clerk that at day 45 after the application was filed, the Clerk must, under the statute, send you a de facto permit if the permit has not been denied or granted.

If one renews in the same Circuit Court jurisdiction, one shouldn't have to send in a copy of a previous permit as proof of competency. Your Circuit Court record indicating the issuance of a previous permit is proof of competency.

Mike said:

But the stature still requires proof of training, e.g., copy of a previously issued CHP.

Click to expand...

That's not entirely accurate. The statute also says that no information other than what is requested on the application may be required, and the application (released by the State Police) clearly states that the proof of competency is required for initial applications only. For renewals, the application only requests the name of the circuit court that issued the previous permit.

When I submitted my renewal in Fairfax last year, I mailed in a notarized copy of the application, a cover letter (including a list of addresses for the previous 5 years, as requested on the application), and a money order for the required amount. That was it, and they processed my renewal with no problems because I submitted everything required by law.

mobeewan said:

If one renews in the same Circuit Court jurisdiction, one shouldn't have to send in a copy of a previous permit as proof of competency. Your Circuit Court record indicating the issuance of a previous permit is proof of competency.

Click to expand...

True statement. At least in Newport News.

Mike said:

You are correct that no ID can be demanded for a CHP application.

Click to expand...

In theory, that is the way it should be handled, but wasn't there an appeals court decision from Fairfax? somewhere that said that the clerk could ask someone to produce ID, since they were required to verify who they were issuing a permit to? I don't recall all of the details, but I do seem to remember that the applicant was Asian, I think.

ProShooter said:

In theory, that is the way it should be handled, but wasn't there an appeals court decision from Fairfax? somewhere that said that the clerk could ask someone to produce ID, since they were required to verify who they were issuing a permit to? I don't recall all of the details, but I do seem to remember that the applicant was Asian, I think.

Click to expand...

I'd be interested in this as well, since it flies in the face of logic due to the fact that the CHP has no photo on it. Also, would be interested in where they cite the requirement to "verify who they were issuing a permit to". If you can renew by mail, there is obviously no control over who opens a letter delivered to an unlocked mailbox.

ETA: I should add more support to my argument. Who they issue the permit to has nothing to do with a picture on an ID. If they do a background check on a name and address, it's either going to be good or not. Unless their argument is that a fictitious (non-existent) person would pass a CHP background check, then I don't believe their point is valid. And IF they are saying that a fictitious person WOULD pass the check and be issued a CHP, well, then maybe they need to fix that.

TFred

peter nap said:

What's the matter with you? Aren't you a good citizen. You need that permit and if you don't obey their demands you can just go to court and holler fish.
The price of selling your soul.:uhoh:

:banana:

Click to expand...

Mr Nap, just wondering if you have any new knitting patterns to exchange? :banghead:

scouser said:

Mr Nap, just wondering if you have any new knitting patterns to exchange? :banghead:

Click to expand...

:lol:.....

Was there ever any status update on the issue in the OP?

μολών λαβέ