Disqualifying events/factors vs. Suitability
With the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in McDonald v. Chicago, the use of “SUITABILITY” to determine who gets or keeps a Permit to Carry Pistols and Revolvers in Connecticut will be challenged in the courts. The arbitrary and capricious manner in which “SUITABILITY” is determined will certainly be examined in depth BY THE LEGISLATURE AND/OR THE COURTS.
Everyone needs to take a very close look at how “SUITABILITY” intentionally or not, is used and abused by public employees and officials in determining who gets to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
I for one have committed my time and a great amount of financial resources to defend my second amendment rights, and ask everyone who reads this document to do likewise.
I’m asking everyone who supports firearm rights to do some research and find at least one National and one State organization that advocates and fights to defend our collective right to KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.
Once you find a National and State organization, I ask that you commit a small but continuing amount of money to support their activities on a monthly basis.
The reason I suggest support for both a National and State organization is because most National Organizations do not have the time or resources to get state specific in their activities. On the other hand, State level organizations tend to target state specific issues and spend most of their time and financial resources in the state where they are located.
The issue that I believe needs to be discussed and challenged in Connecticut is “SUITABILITY”.
I’VE TAKEN THE TIME TO PUT MY THOUGHTS IN WRITING FOR EVERYONE TO READ.
In Connecticut decisions to issue, renew, or revoke Permits to Carry Pistols and Revolvers are based exclusively on two factors, those being, Disqualifying events/factors and Suitability:
Currently Permits to Carry are decided on Disqualifying events/factors and/or Suitability nothing more and nothing less.
To understand the two factors, one must first understand what they are.
Disqualifying events/factors are widely published, established and understood at the Federal and State level, and easily determined and understood by most individuals. The clear understanding of disqualifying events and factors prevents public employees or members of the public from misunderstanding exactly what they are and arriving at different conclusions as to who is or is not a disqualified person.
You either are or are not a disqualified person when applying for or possessing a permit to own or carry a firearm based on the well established written lists of disqualifying, events or factors.
Most if not all disqualifying factors can be found by a local state or national criminal history records check or a search of various government databases which are available and used by Federal, State and local issuing authorities.
Suitability on the other hand has been and is based on a variety of unpublished undefined factors, and is currently determined in an arbitrary and capricious manner by individual employees and/or the issuing authorities who are authorized by law to make determinations of a person’s suitability.
A voluminous amount of hard copy and electronically stored public records currently exist which demonstrate when and how suitability has been determined, and offer undisputable evidence of the extremely differing determinations on suitability even when based on similar circumstances.
Unlike disqualifying factors/events, the public records available clearly show that determinations of a person’s suitability have been, (and currently are), affected by a wide variety of personal, political and other beliefs which have in the past, (and will in the future), result in a wide range of differing determinations using the same set of facts.
Example 1, Individuals may have their application denied because they failed to correctly answer a question on the application, therefore creating the situation where they are considered an unsuitable person because they signed a notarized document with incorrect information.
The actual crime of signing an incorrect notarized statement is NOT a disqualifying crime and can easily be overcome by submission of a corrected application.
Example 2, Individuals may have a permit renewal rejected because they refuse to provide additional information requested by issuing authorities. The refusal to provide additional information results in a de facto determination of the right to possess a valid permit to carry based only on the issuing authorities belief that failure to supply the additional information makes the current permit holder an unsuitable person.
The possession of the valid permit to carry should be considered prima fascia evidence that all appropriate information is currently on file for the renewal of the permit and that the person was and is suitable to obtain a renewal.
Example 3, Individuals who legally carry their weapon(s) openly or concealed, have been and may still become the subject of a revocation action following an arrest for such crimes as Breach of Peace, Disorderly Conduct or other non disqualifying charge(s) simply because someone has seen the legally carried weapon call the police and complained about being upset or alarmed.
Charges and/or convictions for Breach of Peace or Disorderly Conduct are NOT disqualifying events, and do not disqualify a person from applying for or obtaining a permit to carry.
Yet certain individuals who possess the authority to deny or revoke permits, (depending on the jurisdiction where you make application), use non disqualifying arrests and convictions as the basis to consider an individual unsuitable.
The ramifications of using “SUITABILITY” as a required factor in obtaining or possessing a Permit to Carry a Pistol or Revolver must end in order to protect the equal rights of every individual who is otherwise qualified to possess and carry a firearm for self defense.
Now if you choose, take the time to read this appeal brief that was recently filed in the Connecticut Appeallate Court.