Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Antiguns bills are sailing through legislature - some w/CCDL support uh!

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    Antiguns bills are sailing through legislature - some w/CCDL support uh!

    https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillst...&bill_num=5054

    https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillst...&bill_num=5623

    https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillst...&bill_num=5408

    https://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillst...&bill_num=5409

    5409 has support of CCDL even though its an anti-gun bill for sure....

    This year, no anti-gun bill is not seen as a good thing by our legislature ....

    Carrying? Gotta show ID ... etc....

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    ...

    5409 has support of CCDL even though its an anti-gun bill for sure....

    This year, no anti-gun bill is not seen as a good thing by our legislature ....

    Carrying? Gotta show ID ... etc....
    5409 would FORCE the local issuing authorities to abide by the statutorily defined process that the legislature laid down years ago. It would preclude them from asking for things above and beyond such as:

    Reference letters
    Neighbor interviews
    privacy waivers
    financial waivers
    medical waivers
    etc....

    Are you suggesting that supporting a bill which ties the hands of the local issuing authorities to delve into stuff in peoples lives that is none of their damn business is anti gun?

  3. #3
    Regular Member HPmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,597
    Thank goodness- CT will be safe once the 2A is put in a little box under the stairs....


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    “Men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them"
    -Thomas Hobbes 1651

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldCoaster View Post
    5409 would FORCE the local issuing authorities to abide by the statutorily defined process that the legislature laid down years ago. It would preclude them from asking for things above and beyond such as:

    Reference letters
    Neighbor interviews
    privacy waivers
    financial waivers
    medical waivers
    etc....

    Are you suggesting that supporting a bill which ties the hands of the local issuing authorities to delve into stuff in peoples lives that is none of their damn business is anti gun?
    The law is now this way (quasi-judicial and courts have made their rulings ~ agencies know the rulings) so nothing gained there ... CCDL supports this horrible bill.

    See anything else positive? Nope, all negative. Its a bill full of more limitations against folks.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 04-03-2016 at 12:40 AM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member HPmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,597
    I expect to see the CT crime rate go down some more after this law hoes I not effect. I suppose CT translates all of it into Spanish?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    “Men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them"
    -Thomas Hobbes 1651

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by HPmatt View Post
    I expect to see the CT crime rate go down some more after this law hoes I not effect. I suppose CT translates all of it into Spanish?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    5409 is supported by supposedly "pro-gun" folks. But in reality, it does nothing pro-gun at all.

    Local issuing authorities now cannot ask for references, etc. They just ignore law or they'll read the new law in any manner that they want.

    You'll see no language that if they do not issue the permit in 8 weeks that the permit is automatically considered granted.

    And now you have to prove that the safety class instructor is authorized by the state or the NRA .. how is one to do that? if you need to ask for records from the state police, it takes them a year or more to provide records to the public. Most people would say "well, you would have the certificate!". So what? It proves nothing. Anyone can print one out. And you don't know if the instructor is authorized by the NRA..you think so, but you have no evidence of this. The bill could have said that any certificate is prima facia evidence of the instructor's authorization by the NRA but it does not. Think you'll get a letter from the NRA? Ha ! Dreamer !

    I'm certain issuance of permits will go down to zero for some localities if this bill is passed, just based on the changes to the safety class requirements and the inability of people to get evidence of the instructor's authorization by the NRA.

    Look who wrote this law: Commie Dargan ... who recent said in respect to the bill requiring OCer to show their permits upon demand "Just show them your permit!"

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    The law is now this way (quasi-judicial and courts have made their rulings ~ agencies know the rulings) so nothing gained there ... CCDL supports this horrible bill.

    See anything else positive? Nope, all negative. Its a bill full of more limitations against folks.
    The local issuing authorities CAN and DO ask (keyword ask) for all manner of stuff and they bully the applicants into providing them because they don't know any better.

    This bill would stop all that, it's the next step towards taking the local issuing authorities out of the mix altogether. If you're not a prohibited person, here's your permit. (Since we all know CT, unless there's a crash and burn and a complete flushing of the senate and house as well as get rid of dippy Dan, will never be Constitutional Carry).

    CT is basically a liberal run festering pit. Chipping away at the authority of the local police to rule as to suitability based on whims and personal gut feelings is a slow method.

    I don't know where you live David, but when you got your permit, did they ask you for more than they were allowed to? how did you respond to that? When you carry your pistol out in the neighborhood do the police stop and ask you for your permit?
    Last edited by GoldCoaster; 04-04-2016 at 07:06 PM. Reason: off to of

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldCoaster View Post
    The local issuing authorities CAN and DO ask (keyword ask) for all manner of stuff and they bully the applicants into providing them because they don't know any better.

    This bill would stop all that, it's the next step towards taking the local issuing authorities out of the mix altogether. If you're not a prohibited person, here's your permit. (Since we all know CT, unless there's a crash and burn and a complete flushing of the senate and house as well as get rid of dippy Dan, will never be Constitutional Carry).

    CT is basically a liberal run festering pit. Chipping away at the authority of the local police to rule as to suitability based on whims and personal gut feelings is a slow method.

    I don't know where you live David, but when you got your permit, did they ask you for more than they were allowed to? how did you respond to that? When you carry your pistol out in the neighborhood do the police stop and ask you for your permit?
    DESPP's form now asks for more than can be required but folks still complete it, right? And as for people running around getting non-required things done, this law will not change anything as the law now prohibits it .. they'll read the statue as they see fit .. would stop nothing. People should know the law.

    Nothing is positive about the bill. Tell me how you are going to prove that your instructor is NRA authorized? You never will be able to.
    Wait and find out or try to stop the bill from becoming law.

    Yeah, CT is a festering liberal pit. One does not need permission to exercise a right.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    DESPP's form now asks for more than can be required but folks still complete it, right? And as for people running around getting non-required things done, this law will not change anything as the law now prohibits it .. they'll read the statue as they see fit .. would stop nothing. People should know the law.

    Nothing is positive about the bill. Tell me how you are going to prove that your instructor is NRA authorized? You never will be able to.
    Wait and find out or try to stop the bill from becoming law.

    Yeah, CT is a festering liberal pit. One does not need permission to exercise a right.
    On your first point, this is true, everyone that mentions letters of recommendation and other such things I tell them they aren't required and not to submit them and if they refuse the application file at the board for constructive denial. So you are correct, people should know the law. The text of the bill says the locals cannot add things to this form.

    As for the NRA certificate - I see no mention of proving that the NRA certificate is legitimate nor the instructor is authorized. Did we read a different bill?

    One does not need permission to exercise a right. In a perfect world, or at least in a state that valued the Constitution you are correct. Maine and Vermont have Constitutional Carry now along with several other states. Connecticut isn't one of them. Can I construe from your statement that you don't have a permit to carry pistols and revolvers and therefore don't carry at all, or that you do carry without a permit and risk a felony charge if caught doing so? I'm a bit lost here.

    Regards.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldCoaster View Post
    On your first point, this is true, everyone that mentions letters of recommendation and other such things I tell them they aren't required and not to submit them and if they refuse the application file at the board for constructive denial. So you are correct, people should know the law. The text of the bill says the locals cannot add things to this form.

    As for the NRA certificate - I see no mention of proving that the NRA certificate is legitimate nor the instructor is authorized. Did we read a different bill?

    One does not need permission to exercise a right. In a perfect world, or at least in a state that valued the Constitution you are correct. Maine and Vermont have Constitutional Carry now along with several other states. Connecticut isn't one of them. Can I construe from your statement that you don't have a permit to carry pistols and revolvers and therefore don't carry at all, or that you do carry without a permit and risk a felony charge if caught doing so? I'm a bit lost here.

    Regards.
    The NRA certificate point: exactly correct .... local authorities will say "Prove that the instructor is an authorized one." Under current law, you need not prove this.

    Another thing to consider: one cannot leave the 4 walls of one's dwelling w/o a permit. So how can you practice to acquire and maintain proficiency? As in CT, when a person is denied a permit they don't go and take away the person's guns ~ because they can own them .. they just decide you are not fit to get a permit. Now you have a gun you cannot acquire and maintain proficiency with. Isn't that part of the right to KBA ?


    What changes are there to current law? It ADDS requirements the bill says so:

    The bill requires applicants to submit the following, in addition to the completed and notarized application forms:

    1. two sets of fingerprints to be processed in accordance with the state law governing the collection of fingerprints for gun permit applications;

    2. a certificate of successful completion of a safety or training course in handgun use signed by an instructor certified by the state or the National Rifle Association; and

    3. for U.S. citizens, a birth certificate, naturalization certificate, or valid U.S. passport; and, for aliens, a permanent resident card, a valid visa, or an employment authorization form.

    Current law does not specify what applicants must submit.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    The NRA certificate point: exactly correct .... local authorities will say "Prove that the instructor is an authorized one." Under current law, you need not prove this.

    Another thing to consider: one cannot leave the 4 walls of one's dwelling w/o a permit. So how can you practice to acquire and maintain proficiency? As in CT, when a person is denied a permit they don't go and take away the person's guns ~ because they can own them .. they just decide you are not fit to get a permit. Now you have a gun you cannot acquire and maintain proficiency with. Isn't that part of the right to KBA ?


    What changes are there to current law? It ADDS requirements the bill says so:

    The bill requires applicants to submit the following, in addition to the completed and notarized application forms:

    1. two sets of fingerprints to be processed in accordance with the state law governing the collection of fingerprints for gun permit applications;

    2. a certificate of successful completion of a safety or training course in handgun use signed by an instructor certified by the state or the National Rifle Association; and

    3. for U.S. citizens, a birth certificate, naturalization certificate, or valid U.S. passport; and, for aliens, a permanent resident card, a valid visa, or an employment authorization form.

    Current law does not specify what applicants must submit.
    Actually there is a way to verify if an NRA instructor's credentials are up to date.... Takes all of 60 seconds or so.

Posting Permissions

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