Denver Post: CCW Database "incomplete, riddled with errors"

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_16900805#ixzz18fwuXHjs
Kirk Mitchell: 303-954-1206 or kmitchell@denverpost.com

"Colorado's concealed-weapons database does not contain information about 16,000 permits — 45 percent of those issued — partly because 20 counties, including Douglas and El Paso, don't enter the information with Colorado Crime Information Center.

And that is just part of the problem. Among other audit findings:

• Of 51,000 records that are entered by participating sheriff's offices onto the computer system, 32,000, or 63 percent, of the records contain inaccuracies, the audit says.

• Although concealed-gun permits expire in five years, the database contains records for dozens of permits claiming they won't expire for 40, 50 or 100 years.

• 2,000 records in the database are duplicates, with one showing the permit as valid, and a second showing it as revoked — for the same person.

• Another 2,700 permits indicate on an initial screen that a person has a permit while a secondary screen shows that they were denied a permit."

--END OF EXCERPT--

While the issue of inaccurate information is a real concern, I wondered whether any Douglas or El Paso CCW holders might want to give Mr. Mitchell a call and let him know that we might be proud of our sheriffs for not entering us as "Persons of Interest" in the CCIC database.

I tried to do my part:

Article read. Smart aleck comment left.

I nearly came out of my chair when I read this comment:

"I got my CCW permit a few years ago and I can tell you that there is no discrepancies when it comes to my name in the database. I've been reminded of that fact a few times now from police officers already.

The last encounter was at a sobriety checkpoint when the officer asked if she could search my vehicle. I refused. The officer then told me that she could revoke my CCW permit if I didn't cooperate. She didn't pursue it any further and let me go at that point, thankfully."


THIS cop needs to be fired and THIS is why we carry voice recorders.

Here's the $2.50 I left in response:

This database is ILLEGAL under C.R.S. 18-12-206 Parts 3(a) and 3(b)(I).

3(a): "Upon request by another criminal justice agency for law enforcement purposes, the sheriff may, at his or her discretion, share information from the list of permittees with a law enforcement agency FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING THE VALIDITY OF A PERMIT." (emphasis mine)

Example of Proper Use:
(State Police): "We busted J. Doe for speeding, and he had a concealed weapons permit - is it valid?"

(Issuing County Sheriff): "No, it was revoked a year ago after a DUI charge."

Example of Illegal Use:
(State Police): "We're trying to update that pesky database; can you e-mail us a copy of your list?"

NO. No sheriff is authorized to share the list itself, as per 3(b)(I), which states, "...a sheriff SHALL NOT share information from the list of permittees with a law enforcement agency for the purpose of creating a statewide database of permittees, and any law enforcement agency that receives information concerning permittees from a sheriff shall SHALL NOT use the information to create or maintain a statewide database of permittees. Any information concerning a permittee that is included in a statewide database pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subsection (3) SHALL BE REMOVED from the database no later than July 1, 2011." (emphasis mine)

Stop breaking the law, lawmen! You have just over six months to get rid of your illegal database.

Wow, nice find mate, I did not know that.

Let's see.... Database is incomplete and data contained is possibly in error, what to do? what to do?

MY IDEA,

Delete that database, eliminate the requirement of a government permit to give me permission to exercise a Constitutionally Fundamental Right....

delete the database
Constitutional Carry Nationwide for all not in jail (for any conviction) , adjudicated mentally defective/insane, or on parole or probation. Once the probation ends, restore ALL their constitutionally protected rights UNLESS you can prove by a preponderance of evidence that they are not safe to be in public---- and if that is the case, Just why in the hell are they out of jail in the first place?

Half Live said:

Wow, nice find mate, I did not know that.

Click to expand...

Thanks. I stumbled across it while reading through all C.R.S. gun laws last Spring. It must have stuck, as I kept asking myself, "isn't this illegal?" while reading the article. A quick review of the statutes revealed that yes, the database is illegal.

Only the issuing county's sheriff' is authorized to keep a CHP database, containing only the information required for the CHP application, and only for those CHPs they've issued in their own county.

The reason for this statute is clear: It's to prevent what 74% of the officers polled have already admitted to doing: Profiling people they're stopping for traffic violations by illegally using a driver's lawful activity. Whether I attend church regularly, shop at the mall, hold a concealed hangun permit, or see a movie once a month is none of the their damned business! It lawful activity, and has absolutely nothing to do with the traffic stop.

If they want to profile people they're stopping based on information of a criminal nature, that's fine. But don't profile us based upon our lawful activities. For one, that's just stupid, as we're less of a threat than the general public (those background checks aren't just for show, you know). For another, as 74% of the police officers admitted, they're doing it so they'll know "who is armed." Really! They believe people without CHPs are unarmed? :banghead:

That false sense of security puts our boys in blue into some serious jeopardy with non-CHP holders, just as their illegal database puts us law-abiding CHP holders at greater risk during a traffic stop, as well. There's a reason most laws are on the books! I sure wish our boys in blue would follow them, both for their own sakes, as well as ours.

I don't think I'll be getting any stocking stuffers from Colorado's finest this year. Hopefully, however, when the 74% who admitted using the illegal database during the audit stop leading themselves into a false sense of security, a few more of them will be around for Christmas next year. Perhaps then I'll get a stocking stuffer, then.