Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Conversation with Hartford PD Sgt.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Middletown, CT, ,
    Posts
    29

    Post imported post

    A Hartford PD Sergeant that I am acquainted with told me today that HPD officers are now being trained that Open Carry is legal, and the OC'ers will not be charged with Breach of Peace based on citizen complaints.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    7

    Post imported post

    Oh good.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Hartford, Connecticut, United States
    Posts
    68

    Post imported post

    That's Great!

  4. #4
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    Shouldn't we be emailing the Chief to ask him if this 100% true and if it is, thanking him for doing the right thing?
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  5. #5
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    sdrct wrote:
    A Hartford PD Sergeant that I am acquainted with told me today that HPD officers are now being trained that Open Carry is legal, and the OC'ers will not be charged with Breach of Peace based on citizen complaints.
    Great!

    This is just what happenned in Pennsylvania - the only way to make a state safe for open carry is for folks to open carry!

    Can somebody get some of the training docs on this? Best way s thru the back door from police buddy - or go to FOIA type channels if necessary.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605

    Post imported post

    Hartford Police Department should work to make a good impression on neighboring Agencies throughout Hatrford County.

    The other Agencies that could well benefit from this are: Bristol and New Britian.

    Now, if only Hartford would remove the Illegal Ordinance 26-39, concerning Firearms in Parks, arbiet there is no State-wide Firearms Preemption.



  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator Gray Peterson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lynnwood, Washington, USA
    Posts
    2,238

    Post imported post

    aadvark wrote:
    Hartford Police Department should work to make a good impression on neighboring Agencies throughout Hatrford County.

    The other Agencies that could well benefit from this are: Bristol and New Britian.

    Now, if only Hartford would remove the Illegal Ordinance 26-39, concerning Firearms in Parks, arbiet there is no State-wide Firearms Preemption.

    It's judicial preemption per Dwyer v. Farrell.

    Although the statutory pattern evinces a legislative intent to regulate the flow of handgun sales and restrict the right to sell to those establishing the requisite qualifications, it is also clear that the General Assembly anticipated that persons meeting those qualifications, including those living in residential neighborhoods and nondealers, would be permitted to sell at retail a pistol or revolver. The legislature has struck the balance between totally unregulated sales and a complete ban on sales of handguns at retail.

    In passing this handgun ordinance, the city has placed two important and substantial restrictions on the sale at retail of handguns which most residents of the city can never overcome: (1) that the seller be a dealer, and (2) that the sale occur on premises located in an area zoned[6] as a business district.[7] By placing these restrictions on the sale of handguns, the ordinance effectively prohibits what the state statutes clearly permit. Nor do the defendants suggest any practical means available to either plaintiff of conforming to the ordinance.

    A local ordinance is preempted by a state statute whenever the legislature has demonstrated an intent to occupy the entire field of regulation on the matter; East Haven v. New Haven, 159 Conn. 453, 469, 271 A.2d 110 (1970); or, as here, whenever the local ordinance irreconcilably conflicts with the statute. Shelton v. City of Shelton, 111 Conn. 433, 447, 150 A. 811 (1930). Accord, Times Mirror Co. v. Division of Public Utility Control, 192 Conn. 506, 511, 473 A.2d 768 (1984). The fact that a local ordinance does not expressly conflict with a statute enacted by the General Assembly will not save it when the legislative purpose in enacting the statute is frustrated by the ordinance. Here the New Haven ordinance removes an entire class of persons as potential sellers of handguns at retail. The state permit is rendered an illusory right because a casual seller residing in a non-business zone can have no real hope of ever conforming to the local ordinance. In this respect the local ordinance conflicts with the legislative intent as expressed in the applicable statutes. The city has removed a right that the state permit bestows and thus has exceeded its powers.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Hartford, Connecticut, United States
    Posts
    68

    Post imported post

    I spoke with Officer Moody earlier this evening to confirm this training, and he states that all he's been told is for firearms to be concealed.

    I told him that there is no law in CT mandating concealment, and we spoke for a bit afterwards bringing up the incident in Glastonbury and what had happened to Rich B in Wallingford.

    Do we know when this training is going to take place or be completed?

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Hartford, CT
    Posts
    85

    Post imported post

    Gray Peterson wrote:
    It's judicial preemption per Dwyer v. Farrell.
    I have analyzed the Hartford park ban ordinance and applicable state laws and have determined that the ban is likely not preempted by state law.* You can read my analysis of that particular ban here: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum14/45667.html

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Delray Beach
    Posts
    46

    Post imported post

    A friend of mine is a Hartford Police Officer, and I asked him yesterdaywhat they are trained to do when they come across an individual OCing, his response was an arrest for BoP, that CT is a CC only state. I directed him to opencarry.org and the DPS website so he can look at the facts for himself, but keep this in the back of your mind, if you're in Hartford, some of their officers still believe OC is illegal. Are we ever going to get a definitive answer from the AG on this matter?

  11. #11
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910

    Post imported post

    20SomethingSnowbird wrote:
    but keep this in the back of your mind, if you're in Hartford, some of their officers still believe OC is illegal.
    This is true all over the state. But what difference does it make if they are wrong? Our job is to educate. That includes LEOs just as much as the public.

    Are we ever going to get a definitive answer from the AG on this matter?
    Don't hold your breath.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646

    Post imported post

    Rich B wrote:
    20SomethingSnowbird wrote:
    but keep this in the back of your mind, if you're in Hartford, some of their officers still believe OC is illegal.
    This is true all over the state. But what difference does it make if they are wrong? Our job is to educate. That includes LEOs just as much as the public.

    Are we ever going to get a definitive answer from the AG on this matter?
    Don't hold your breath.
    Probably more-so for the LEO's as they are the ones most likely to give you grief over OC (Rich's superman bail bondsman not withstanding).

  13. #13
    Regular Member Lenny Benedetto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    VP of CCDL, Inc., ,
    Posts
    470

    Post imported post

    GoldCoaster wrote:
    Rich B wrote:
    20SomethingSnowbird wrote:
    but keep this in the back of your mind, if you're in Hartford, some of their officers still believe OC is illegal.
    This is true all over the state. But what difference does it make if they are wrong? Our job is to educate. That includes LEOs just as much as the public.

    Are we ever going to get a definitive answer from the AG on this matter?
    Don't hold your breath.
    Probably more-so for the LEO's as they are the ones most likely to give you grief over OC (Rich's superman bail bondsman not withstanding).
    When we get a real AG in the office we will get that answer. We all need to see that Martha Dean gets elected!
    I have shot with her and she KNOWS the law!
    The Connecticut Citizens Defense League is a non-partisan, grassroots organization devoted to advocating rights affirmed by the Constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Connecticut. We are especially dedicated to protecting the unalienable right of all citizens to keep and bear arms, for the defense of both self and state, through public enlightenment and legislative action.
    Join Here: http://www.ccdl.us/membership

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Monroe
    Posts
    2

    Question

    I am new to the forum and would like to update my recent experience with the open carry discusion. I have a family member who is in the State Police. After pointing out that OC is legal in CT, he called some of his higher ups. One was a nice guy who basically said you will be arrested and another who I didn't speak to just told my family member to get the hell out of there.(IE I am a nut). So then I remember Someone stating that Hartford PD might be training their officers that OC is legal. My cousin called and I followed up with a call and the answer was the same. Officer William Smith said the state law was that it be covered.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646
    Quote Originally Posted by JG7470 View Post
    I am new to the forum and would like to update my recent experience with the open carry discusion. I have a family member who is in the State Police. After pointing out that OC is legal in CT, he called some of his higher ups. One was a nice guy who basically said you will be arrested and another who I didn't speak to just told my family member to get the hell out of there.(IE I am a nut). So then I remember Someone stating that Hartford PD might be training their officers that OC is legal. My cousin called and I followed up with a call and the answer was the same. Officer William Smith said the state law was that it be covered.
    When you call and ask you're getting an opinion, that's all.. and opinions are like ********, everyone has one.

    IF they had bothered to go to the statutes and put 2 and 2 together they would see that there is NOWHERE that concealment is mandated. DPS brass themselves said so in the memo they put out the the CSP folks who were watching the 2A marchers earlier this year, a more safe. orderly and patriotic bunch you will ever meet. The DPS said that CSP troopers can not even ASK to see the permit of someone open-carrying UNLESS that request is made during some other investigatory procedure like you were doing something illegal. If OC was against the law that memo would have been written a lot differently.

    If the local plod thinks OC is illegal and decide to arrest for BoP then they are going to suffer at the hands of a civil rights lawsuit, and suffer until they get it into their heads what the law really says.

    All this could have been solved with a declaratory ruling if our current Attorney General wasn't such a yellow-bellied media sycophant. Still, not long now!

    Carry on!

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Norwalk, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    265
    If the local plod thinks OC is illegal and decide to arrest for BoP then they are going to suffer at the hands of a civil rights lawsuit, and suffer until they get it into their heads what the law really says.

    Has this hapenned yet? I thought that so far all thats happened was charges getting thrown out. Itd be better if it were treated as a criminal matter, as ALL false arrests should be. Imagine if a mere citizen took it upon him/herself to apprehend, handcuff & lock up another person because they didn't like what someone else was doing. I think thats a fair assessment of what happened to both Rich & Mr. Goldberg.
    A crime doesn't become not a crime because its perpetrated by a LEO.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    East Hartford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    112

    Smile I Think let this year elections 2-amend supporters do there job.

    Thats if they take office. and make this open carry issue final state law! that way LEO'S won't be confused that OC is LEGAL. I already have my 2-AMENDMENT SENATE'S AND CONGRESS'S supporters on my list .and i thank and support CCDL and NRA -ILA for right to fight to BEAR ARMS. even to OPEN CARRY. GOD BLESS AMERICA MY HOME SWEET HOME.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Lenny Benedetto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    VP of CCDL, Inc., ,
    Posts
    470
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldCoaster View Post
    When you call and ask you're getting an opinion, that's all.. and opinions are like ********, everyone has one.

    IF they had bothered to go to the statutes and put 2 and 2 together they would see that there is NOWHERE that concealment is mandated. DPS brass themselves said so in the memo they put out the the CSP folks who were watching the 2A marchers earlier this year, a more safe. orderly and patriotic bunch you will ever meet. The DPS said that CSP troopers can not even ASK to see the permit of someone open-carrying UNLESS that request is made during some other investigatory procedure like you were doing something illegal. If OC was against the law that memo would have been written a lot differently.

    If the local plod thinks OC is illegal and decide to arrest for BoP then they are going to suffer at the hands of a civil rights lawsuit, and suffer until they get it into their heads what the law really says.

    All this could have been solved with a declaratory ruling if our current Attorney General wasn't such a yellow-bellied media sycophant. Still, not long now!

    Carry on!
    The is the link to the memo that Goldcoaster is talking about.
    http://www.ccdl.us/attachments/100_M...%204-10-10.pdf
    If OC is illegal than it looks like they are making up their own rules per this memo, which I highly doubt!!
    Last edited by Lenny Benedetto; 07-25-2010 at 10:40 PM.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Alex.EastHartford. View Post
    Thats if they take office. and make this open carry issue final state law! that way LEO'S won't be confused that OC is LEGAL. I already have my 2-AMENDMENT SENATE'S AND CONGRESS'S supporters on my list .and i thank and support CCDL and NRA -ILA for right to fight to BEAR ARMS. even to OPEN CARRY. GOD BLESS AMERICA MY HOME SWEET HOME.
    No offense meant, but I think you are way too optimistic. No politician will ever stand for our rights the way we need them to, no matter what sweet whisperings they are making into your ear right now.

    It will always be the duty of the citizens to fight for their rights.

  20. #20
    Regular Member KennyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Mountain Top
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by rich b View Post
    no offense meant, but i think you are way too optimistic. No politician will ever stand for our rights the way we need them to, no matter what sweet whisperings they are making into your ear right now.

    It will always be the duty of the citizens to fight for their rights.
    amen!!!

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    East Hartford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    112

    Cool

    Hi Rich B..how you doing? Thanks for the comment. Yeah I try to stay optimistic. I am just trying to have hope that the politicians can make a difference..but time will tell.

    Whats the progress on the state parks. The CCDL pamphlet had a note that it is under further investigation..keep me updated.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  22. #22
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    Quote Originally Posted by 20SomethingSnowbird View Post
    Are we ever going to get a definitive answer from the AG on this matter?
    I don't think we need a "definitive answer" on this from the AG...... as we already know it's legal.

    If he were to publish a statement, I think all it would do is get some gun fearing twit in Hartford to sponsor/write legislation to "fill" that loophole.

    Jonathan

Posting Permissions

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