Letters of Recomendations

imported post

http://www.theday.com/article/20100130/NWS01/301309952/1019&town=

In case anyone is interested, I was sent this article this morning.

EDIT: Forgive my spelling.

imported post

Pretty cute eh? and the majority of the folks responsible for that are right here in this forum as officers and members of the CCDL.

Check it out www.ccdl.us and join us!

imported post

My hat is off to them all. Thank You.

imported post

I think this is a better report since it shows that wider scope of information being sought by local authorities.
HINT: It's not "just" the 3 letters of recommendation! :cuss:

http://www.ammoland.com/2010/01/28/connecticut-citizens-defense-league-gets-clarification-on-ct-pistol-permits-applications/

imported post

SUGGESTIONS BASED ON FACTS

After extremely careful review of the Connecticut General Statues, one or more Court Decisions, a 1968 Attorney Generals Legal Opinion, the current application for a Permit to Carry or EligibilityCertificateI believe that I fully understand the way the process is intended to work.

I first listed all of the REQUIRED information to submit an application and then created a time line based on mandated times contained in the State Statutes.

I then reduced my findings to writing and posted then on my website.

You may read my personal beliefs at this link:

http://www.ctgunrights.com/00.Docs/DPS%20form%20799%20Application.documents.suggestions.pdf

imported post

(HINT: It's not "just" the 3 letters of recommendation!))

Douglas in CT,

My apologies. I meant only to to highlight the content of the article. I am aware of the other related issues not mentioned in the it. I still thought it was at least a good start that a local paper picked it up and ran it, if only for the reason I will state below.

One has to do a little reading between the lines. In one quote a person brought in the letters even though he was not asked, and the authority didn't request it.

I'm sure we have many fine people in law enforcement, but the bottom line is in a lot of cases they will not tell you what you "don't" need, even if mandated by DPS. For that reason I believe the article, though limited, was a good start.


BIG EDIT: Douglas,

I may have read more into your post than was there. I mistook your position and upon re-reading now understand what you mean.

imported post

This information seems to be out of date as the The Latest DPS-799C Was Revised (5/06) and asks Yes or No Questions.
Also your Statement of " This Information will be Supplied through the results of the requested state and federal criminal history records check" Can be used for all "YES" "NO" Questions.
As this type of question is asking you to violate the 5Th amendment just by a response to the Question. Just asking.

imported post

[align=left]

DPS-769-C (Rev. 10/09) is possibly the latest version.[/align]
DPS now has the form online at this link:

http://www.ct.gov/dps/lib/dps/special_licensing_and_firearms/dps-769-c.pdf

imported post

I see they are still requiring proof of citizenship or legal resident status, this was never codified in statute was it?

imported post

Edward Peruta wrote:

[align=left]

DPS-769-C (Rev. 10/09) is possibly the latest version.[/align]
DPS now has the form online at this link:

http://www.ct.gov/dps/lib/dps/special_licensing_and_firearms/dps-769-c.pdf

Click to expand...

I pointed out that form before...as that one does NOT mention the added $50.00 prininting fee...in fact...that form doesn't mention anything about printing for pistol permits

imported post

DPS-769-C is horribly inaccurate and has been every time I've looked at it since 2003. I would not recommend anyone read it.

The application should be the definitive list of what's required.

imported post

Waterbury has been requiring letters as well. Anyone know if they stopped?

imported post

There is nothing on the WPD website indicating a need for anything above and beyond the State Permit Application.

imported post

Last week I had contacted the Putnam Police Chief and politely pointed out the letters of recommendation "step" of their process on their website.He didtake proper action and had it removed.