Re-qualify for CHP ?

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

vrwmiller wrote:

Yes, you can contact VCDL, but they are extremely busy with other things at this point. It may help if you you or your pop initiate some kind of contact with Hopewell and indicate that the law states otherwise and that the judge has no authority to overstep the boundaries.

I still recommend contacting VCDL and, at least, make them aware and ask for advise, if you need to.

Click to expand...

Always drop a note to VCDL. That way they can keep track of such things.

Remember that VCDL is a grass-roots organization, so if you contact them, don't expect them to do anything for you, rather, ask them for advice on how to handle it yourself.

Most of these issues can be resolved by one person with perseverance and knowledge; only the harder ones require VCDL to take action as an organization.

It also gives you a feeling of satisfaction: you are the one defending freedom, getting results. And when it's all said and done, you have some experience under your belt that you can use in future situations, or to pass on to new activists.

In this case, armed with the text of the law and some pointers from VCDL on how to proceed, you may very well be able to squelch this on your own. If not, VCDL will back you. Get 'em!

Click to expand...

+1 Tomahawk

I couldn't have said it better myself.

imported post

chesire17201 wrote:

wouldn't have any of these issue's if the lifetime lic. would have been passed.....

Click to expand...

Lifetime permit has been passed in Virginia but not funded so effectively nonexistant. The obsurd thing is that it would save the state money and not change anything enforcement wise, as NCIC check would still be run every five years.
:banghead: Yata hey

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

chesire17201 wrote:

wouldn't have any of these issue's if the lifetime lic. would have been passed.....

Click to expand...

Lifetime permit has been passed in Virginia but not funded so effectively nonexistant. The obsurd thing is that it would save the state money and not change anything enforcement wise, as NCIC check would still be run every five years.

Click to expand...

I agree. It would not cost the state more in order to do so. However, in the current system, the permit holder is charged the renewal fee. If you look at that through the eyes of the legislature, it's revenue lost.

What the citizens need to do is convince the legislators that there's different ways of increasing revenues and decreasing spending that will not hurt society. How do we do that? pfffft, I have no idea yet... :?

imported post

vrwmiller wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

chesire17201 wrote:

wouldn't have any of these issue's if the lifetime lic. would have been passed.....

Click to expand...

Lifetime permit has been passed in Virginia but not funded so effectively nonexistant. The obsurd thing is that it would save the state money and not change anything enforcement wise, as NCIC check would still be run every five years.

Click to expand...

I agree. It would not cost the state more in order to do so. However, in the current system, the permit holder is charged the renewal fee. If you look at that through the eyes of the legislature, it's revenue lost.

What the citizens need to do is convince the legislators that there's different ways of increasing revenues and decreasing spending that will not hurt society. How do we do that? pfffft, I have no idea yet... :?

Click to expand...

Lifetime renewal would not cost the state or local government money. In fact it would save them money. Under lifetime renewal, only a State Police clerk or automated sysyem need run an NCIC check every 5 yrs.or so. The current procedure requires paperwork/forms, processing, maybe fingerprinting and checking these, clerk and judge's time, salaries, letters sent, permit printing and in some cases postage. Both the State Police and the legislature agree that it would save money and time without losing any element of control - which is really what all of this is about.
Yata hey

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

vrwmiller wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

chesire17201 wrote:

wouldn't have any of these issue's if the lifetime lic. would have been passed.....

Click to expand...

Lifetime permit has been passed in Virginia but not funded so effectively nonexistant. The obsurd thing is that it would save the state money and not change anything enforcement wise, as NCIC check would still be run every five years.

Click to expand...

I agree. It would not cost the state more in order to do so. However, in the current system, the permit holder is charged the renewal fee. If you look at that through the eyes of the legislature, it's revenue lost.

What the citizens need to do is convince the legislators that there's different ways of increasing revenues and decreasing spending that will not hurt society. How do we do that? pfffft, I have no idea yet... :?

Click to expand...

Lifetime renewal would not cost the state or local government money. In fact it would save them money. Under lifetime renewal, only a State Police clerk or automated sysyem need run an NCIC check every 5 yrs.or so. The current procedure requires paperwork/forms, processing, maybe fingerprinting and checking these, clerk and judge's time, salaries, letters sent, permit printing and in some cases postage. Both the State Police and the legislature agree that it would save money and time without losing any element of control - which is really what all of this is about.

Click to expand...

Like I said, I agree. Now take what you've said and find a way to convince your legislators and have them put it into a "funding bill". I say funding bill, because the actual lifetime permit bill has been passed, just not funded. Bescaue it is not funded, it is actually seen as revenue lost. From what I have seen, the legislature sees new bills as a way of increasing revenues (HB3202), therefore, if no additional revenues are attached, then why fund it?

imported post

Because a reduction in expense and freeing up government employee's time is better in all ways. Funding the lifetime permit is almost an oxymoron - the money is already being spent - only then less of it will be spent. Everybody wins except the GG's.
Yata hey

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Because a reduction in expense and freeing up government employee's time is better in all ways. Funding the lifetime permit is almost an oxymoron - the money is already being spent - only then less of it will be spent. Everybody wins except the GG's.

Click to expand...

Now that you have everything worked out here, why don't you draft a letter to your legislators pointing out the same things and explain that?

imported post

You give me entirely too much credit. I have nothing worked out. I am just commenting on what I have learned. Many of our legislators are aware of this (mine included) as is Judy Worthington (Clerk of Courts in Chesterfield) and so far none of our efforts have proved successful - being right doesn't make it so. We contend with the likes of the Death Star committee, forked tongue legislators and everyday ignorance in Jefferson's building and without. But I can still vent abit, I hope.
Yata hey

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

You give me entirely too much credit.  I have nothing worked out.  I am just commenting on what I have learned.  Many of our legislators are aware of this (mine included) as is Judy Worthington (Clerk of Courts in Chesterfield) and so far none of our efforts have proved successful - being right doesn't make it so.  We contend with the likes of the Death Star committee, forked tongue legislators and everyday ignorance in Jefferson's building and without.  But I can still vent abit, I hope.

Click to expand...

And you're selling yourself short.  I used to think the same way.

You take what you have learned and put it into a letter to your legislators.  Explain to them how you feel and what you've "learned".  Explain to them how important such an issue is to you.

You never know, it could be your letter that convinces said legislators to change his/her mind and without it, they'd never change.  It could be that one more letter they got from you that makes them realize "Ok, my consitituents really feel strongly about 'such and such'" that encourages them to think differently.

We need every person to fight for their rights in order to ensure that the government does not forget who it serves and to protect our rights and not infringe upon the rights of it's citizens.

Even if your legislators agree with you particular position, it could still be your letter that your legisaltors share with others that convince the to alter their frame of mind. Never underestimate the impact you could have.
You are one step closer to making a difference.

imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

Lifetime renewal would not cost the state or local government money. In fact it would save them money. Under lifetime renewal, only a State Police clerk or automated sysyem need run an NCIC check every 5 yrs.or so. The current procedure requires paperwork/forms, processing, maybe fingerprinting and checking these, clerk and judge's time, salaries, letters sent, permit printing and in some cases postage. Both the State Police and the legislature agree that it would save money and time without losing any element of control - which is really what all of this is about.
Yata hey

Click to expand...

Actually, it would cost the state more. The law, as written, required background checks of EVERY CHP holder EVERY year.... And they'd loose the revenue from the renewals...

imported post

A letter it shall be then. Maybe if everybody wrote one it would be even better!

Yata hey

imported post

roscoe13 wrote:

Grapeshot wrote:

Lifetime renewal would not cost the state or local government money. In fact it would save them money. Under lifetime renewal, only a State Police clerk or automated sysyem need run an NCIC check every 5 yrs.or so. The current procedure requires paperwork/forms, processing, maybe fingerprinting and checking these, clerk and judge's time, salaries, letters sent, permit printing and in some cases postage. Both the State Police and the legislature agree that it would save money and time without losing any element of control - which is really what all of this is about.
Yata hey

Click to expand...

Actually, it would cost the state more. The law, as written, required background checks of EVERY CHP holder EVERY year.... And they'd loose the revenue from the renewals...

Click to expand...

I was not aware that background checks were run every year on all CHP holders - does anybody have a link to this! It doesn't jive with what I have heard but there is always something new to learn.
Yata hey

imported post

Grapeshot, they aren't. The bill that would have allowed lifetime permits would have had annual background checks. Which would cost more. Which didn't get funded.

Why they felt the need to do them more often than the current 5 years is beyond me.

imported post

Ok - so we are back to square one. Then we push to have the law modified and funded.

It would seem to me that with the wonderfull things that computers are that a program could be written that would enter convictions etc. against the list of permit holders and do away with annual or even five year checks. But then again what do I know - sounds feasible to me though.

Another complaint that I have is that a five (5) year renewal is not for 5 yrs but rather for 4 yr. 10 1/2 months. Chesterfield will not issue your renewal permit beginning with the expiration date of your old permit but insists on dating it the day that it is approved. I have politely butted heads with them over this several times and gotten no good feed back. They tell me to take it up with the legislature. I do not see that my request is in violation of the spirit of the law.

Yata hey

imported post

According to the second amendment, you don't need a license to carry a gun..........

imported post

savery wrote:

According to the second amendment, you don't need a license to carry a gun..........

Click to expand...

Darn, I hate it when someone says something about which I cannot argue !

Yata hey