• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

CT Open Carry legal controversey - THEY WILL BE JUDGED

E

Edward Peruta

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
1,247
Location
Connecticut USA
M

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Edward Peruta wrote:
A new page of information has been added at http://www.ourrockyhill.com which explains the Goldberg situation.

Please visit this link to view the basic facts and view several documents that tell the story.

http://www.ourrockyhill.com/Docs/JUSTIFICATION.REINSTATEMENT.htm

Hopefully you will be able to understand what is going on now that new information has been received and posted.
Click to expand...
Please take the time to tell us what is going on in a few words - 2 senrtences max. Like Lincoln allegedly once wrote,"I would have written you a shorter letter, but I did not have the time."
 
L

Lank

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
66
Location
, ,
imported post

From the link posted:

"Dear Mr. Wilson,

The issue remains that this is not an open carry state. There are instances where the open carry of a firearm may lead to others being inconvenienced, annoyed or alarmed by the presence of a openly carried firearm."


Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. CT is absolutely, positively, without a doubt an open carry state. Those who have carry permits have the right to carry pistols - no law in CT states that they must be concealed. If the police are going to act as though such a law does exist, then that is completely unjust. The duty of a police officer is to enforce the existing laws (even if he doesn't agree with them), not to invent new ones.

When the police arrested Goldberg, they screwed up. I don't understand why police departments/officers don't know how to just admit wrongdoing - when they screw up they frequently do everything they can to deny it and pretend that they acted exactly as they should have.

The problem that arises when the police start performing legal-contortionist-acts to defend their actions is that it sets a precedent. Now, despite open carry being legal in CT, (some) people are going to avoid doing it for fear of arrest.

 
E

Edward Peruta

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
1,247
Location
Connecticut USA
imported post

The court ordered notice of the pending action before the court was sent to every police department on Saturday by certified mail together with a cover letter from Attorney Rachel Baird.
 
marshaul

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

Edward Peruta wrote:
Please remember, most of us agree that driving is not mentioned in the Constitution and is a privilege, not a right.
Click to expand...
If "most of us" agree that unenumerated rights -- like the right to function in a society that basically requires driving -- are actually privileges, for no other reason than their failure to be included in a document which, A: was not prescient enough to prevision "driving" and B: specifically states that it needn't list a right for that right to exist, well... then "most of us" are fools.

I agree drivers licensing is reality; I don't agree it has any moral justification or much positive benefit, other than allowing police to abrogate our fourth amendment rights at will simply because we happen to be driving rather than walking. Oh, wait... :banghead:
 
E

Edward Peruta

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
1,247
Location
Connecticut USA
imported post

My comment about driving being a privilege and not a right must be taken in context with the discussion on pistol permits.

Courts across the country have ruled that once the license is issued, the individual has a property right in the license and it should not be taken in an arbitrary or capricious manner.

The courts in Connecticut are addressing this issue as we write and read these posts.

Please visit http://www.ourrockyhill.com for more info on this topic.

You can read the questions before the court in New Britain, CT at:

http://www.ycgg.org/pdfpages/11_29_2007_dr_request.pdf
 
E

Edward Peruta

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
1,247
Location
Connecticut USA
imported post

On August 22, 2008, Judge Pittman in New Britain approved by court order, the manner under which NOTICE was to be served on ALL police departments in CT regarding the three issues to be decided by the court.

I am providing the link to the cover letter that was sent out to ALL Connecticut Police Departments via Certified Mail on Saturday August 30th.


http://www.ourrockyhill.com/Goldberg.Files/peruta_CoverLetter_082908.pdf
 
marshaul

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

Edward Peruta wrote:
My comment about driving being a privilege and not a right must be taken in context with the discussion on pistol permits.

Courts across the country have ruled that once the license is issued, the individual has a property right in the license and it should not be taken in an arbitrary or capricious manner.

The courts in Connecticut are addressing this issue as we write and read these posts.

Please visit http://www.ourrockyhill.com for more info on this topic.

You can read the questions before the court in New Britain, CT at:

http://www.ycgg.org/pdfpages/11_29_2007_dr_request.pdf
Click to expand...

I understand, I guess my point is that we're fighting the wrong battles in the long run.
 
L

LKB3rd

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
100
Location
Branford, Connecticut, USA
imported post

I am doing one thing at a time, but I might be interested in pursuing some sort of challenge to the permit system for hand guns in CT, since in my view it clearly violates our constitutional RIGHT to keep and BEAR arms, without saying that the right exists as long as we stay in our homes.
Other states got around this by saying that the permit is to conceal only, justifying this by saying that concealment may indicate some shady intentions, and therefore can be regulated. They were then forced to allow openly carrying without a permit so as not to be in violation of the US and state constitutions.
If we force them to allow us to openly carry, I can see a point down the road where they may try to change the carry permit laws to require concealment, and that would be the time to challenge them on making a clearly stated right into a privilege. Personally I would prefer this, and if they ever changed our carry permit to concealed only, and allowed open carry without a permit I would turn in my permit immediately and start open carrying only.
 
B

buketdude

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
313
Location
Enfield, Connecticut, USA
imported post

LKB3rd wrote:
I am doing one thing at a time, but I might be interested in pursuing some sort of challenge to the permit system for hand guns in CT, since in my view it clearly violates our constitutional RIGHT to keep and BEAR arms, without saying that the right exists as long as we stay in our homes.
Other states got around this by saying that the permit is to conceal only, justifying this by saying that concealment may indicate some shady intentions, and therefore can be regulated. They were then forced to allow openly carrying without a permit so as not to be in violation of the US and state constitutions.
If we force them to allow us to openly carry, I can see a point down the road where they may try to change the carry permit laws to require concealment, and that would be the time to challenge them on making a clearly stated right into a privilege. Personally I would prefer this, and if they ever changed our carry permit to concealed only, and allowed open carry without a permit I would turn in my permit immediately and start open carrying only.
Click to expand...
i would only keep my permit for the winter months....where is hard to keep it always open..or if we got something like NH/Maine..which would require a permit to carry loaded in a vehicle..
 
L

LKB3rd

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2007
Messages
100
Location
Branford, Connecticut, USA
imported post

Yea, the more I think about it maybe I would keep it for convenience and flexibility, and when I open carried I would do it with no ID on me at all. I have openly carried like this up in NH and Vermont, and it was fantastic. Hard to describe, but someone else on the NH forum said to me "Sterile carry, yea it feels good. It is the feeling of being a free man." I think that was very well put.
 
E

Edward Peruta

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
1,247
Location
Connecticut USA
imported post

TO ALL FOLLOWING THE GOLDBERG CASE.



THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY TODAY (SEPTEMBER 22ND), SENT NOTICE TO ATTORNEY RACHEL BAIRD THAT JAMES GOLDBERG'S PERMIT TO CARRY PISTOLS AND REVOLVERS HAS BEEN REINSTATED.

A PDF COPY OF THE LETTER AND A LINK TO THE LETTER IN WEBPAGE FORMAT MAY BE FOUND AT WWW.OURROCKYHILL.COM

MR. GOLDBERG MADE NO CONCESSIONS AS PART OF THIS REINSTATEMENT.
 
M

mvpel

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
371
Location
Merrimack, New Hampshire, USA
imported post

Possessing a valid pistol permit does not give the licensee cart blanche to carry a handgun with impunity. Public Safety is one of the main goals of government.
Click to expand...


nashv1.jpg

A sit-in protest at a segregated lunch counter at Walgreens in Nashville.
 
S

Statkowski

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
1,141
Location
Cherry Tree (Indiana County), Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

There are instances where the open carry of a firearm may lead to others being inconvenienced, annoyed or alarmed by the presence of a openly carried firearm.
Click to expand...
Concerning the above quote from a gubmint offishul, who gives a rat's ass if others are inconvenienced, annoyed or alarmed by the presence of an inanimate object? That's their problem. If a citizen is doing nothing illegal, it's not the government's job to step in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top