SUITABILITY to obtain or keep a Permit to Carry in CT

In the newly minted McDonald v. Chicago decision there are may areas that will effect and change existing gun laws throughout the country.

The following section of the opinion addresses "LOCAL VARIATIONS" and "CERTAIN POLICY CHOICES OFF THE TABLE":

Third, JUSTICE BREYER is correct that incorporation of the Second Amendment right will to some extent limit the legislative freedom of the States, but this is always true when a Bill of Rights provision is incorporated. Incorporation always restricts experimentation and LOCAL VARIATIONS, but that has not stopped the Court from incorporating virtually every other provision of the Bill of Rights. “The enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes CERTAIN POLICY CHOICES OFF THE TABLE.” Heller, 554 U. S., at __ (slip op., at 64). This conclusion is no more remarkable with respect to the Second Amendment than it is with respect to all the other limitations on state power found in the Constitution.

In my non legal opinion, this may mean the end to using "SUITABILITY" as and element to issuse, deny or revoke a Permit to Carry Pistols and Revolvers in Connecticut.

Suitability obviously varies from town to town in decsions on whether or not to issue a permit, and varies considerably in different cases heard by the Board of Firearms Permit Examiners.

Given the fact that determinations on suitability vary considerably from Issuing Authority to Issuing Authority, I know believe that using it to make decsions is clearly in violation of McDonald v. Chicago.

We'll have to watch and see what happens in the near future.

My thought is they must drop the permit requirement to simply buy a handgun and bring it home...

buketdude said:

My thought is they must drop the permit requirement to simply buy a handgun and bring it home...

Click to expand...

We're a long way from that. Simply enough, the state can argue that you don't need to subject yourself to a 'suitability' check to purchase a handgun because they've given us another way: eligibility certificates. It's a straight thumbs up or down if you meet the requirements and inherently there are no arbitrary applications of the requirements. You either meet them, or you don't and it has to be equally applied across all applicants.

However, it could be argued that paying for an eligibility certificate to exercise a 'fundamental' right in the State of Connecticut is cost prohibitive for many, and thus seen as a restriction on one's 2A rights. $100 NRA Basic Pistol Course + $50 State Background Check + $19.25 FBI background + $35 for the certificate = $204.25 to exercise a 'fundamental' right. How can those in the inner city, who are likely below the poverty line, afford over $200 plus the cost of a handgun to protect their home from criminals?

I think we're going to have to wait for the next DC case to clarify carry. Then we can start working against the current permit system.

I predict that the right federal case will eliminate "SUITABILITY" finding currently required by state statute and mandate that the same criteria used to obtain "Eligibility Certificates" will be used for Permits to Carry.

If all that was necessary was proof that the applicant or person possessing a permit has not been CONVICTED of a disqualifying violation of the law, then the permit SHALL be issued renewed or retained.

I also agree that the right plaintiff may be able to successfully challange the monetary requirements to obtain an Eligibility Certificate or Pemit to Carry.

If entitlement to Eligibility Certificates or Permits to Carry were based soley on the CONVICTION history of applicants, then the Board of Firearms Permit Examiners would not be necessary!

In simple terms, if you have NO disqualifiers, then you have the constitutional RIGHT to purchase, posess and carry a firearm/handgun.