Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 33

Thread: Carry in CT DMV buildings?

  1. #1
    Regular Member Freiheit417's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    167

    Carry in CT DMV buildings?

    Hello all,

    I'm having trouble finding whether it is legal or not to carry in a Connecticut DMV building.

    I can't find anything in the statutes other than CGS § 29-28(e) that states “[T]he issuance of a permit to carry a pistol or revolver does not thereby authorize the possession or carrying of a pistol or revolver in any premises where the possession or carrying of a pistol or revolver is otherwise prohibited by law or is prohibited by the person who owns or exercises control over such premises."

    Since the "incident" at the Enfield DMV on May 16, 2007, I'm wondering if they have since posted signs prohibiting weapons?

    "Reported to the A/L, (Above/Location), for a party with a possible gun. C, (complainant), state the party later identified as XXX, was at the counter and that he was told by a passerby that XXX may have a concealed weapon. The A/L was not posted that he could not have a weapon (gun). I spoke to XXX who stated that he did have a concealed weapon Gun Permit for XXX was valid and the gun a Ruger P345 pisto XXXX were legal. Was negative NCIC, XXXX stated that the party may have seen his holster when he XXXXX answered his cell phone (same side his gun was on). CSP Trooper Bonola also confirmed that it was not illegal at DMV."
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?38620


    Specifically, I'm wondering if the New Britain and Enfield locations are currently posted? If not, then would it still be legal?


    Thanks so much.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Plainville, CT, ,
    Posts
    120
    I don't have any link for you you but I do know that New Britain is not posted. And I don't consider the DMV a "sensitive location", just a regular old dump.
    Wont matter soon. NB is closing down Aug 11.

  3. #3
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    And..... here's the funny thing.....

    Don't forget to open carry, New Britain has an ordinance banning concealed carry.

    Jonathan
    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com - tracking all the local issuing authority, DPS and other insanity with permit issues
    www.ctgunsafety.com - my blog and growing list of links useful to gun owners (especially in Connecticut).

    Rich B: My favorite argument against OC being legal in CT is "I have never seen someone OC in CT".
    I have never seen a person drink tea from a coke bottle while standing on their head, that doesn't mean it is illegal.

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

    Wink

    I was just at Old Saybrook DMV and I carried. No signs, no issues.

    There is no specific statute, and I have yet to see a sign. I would be comfortable OCing.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Hartford, Connecticut, United States
    Posts
    68
    Rich,
    Isn't the DMV state property? Isn't that a BIG no-no?

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Plain and simple

    If there is no law and/or no signs prohibiting firearms then it's ok to carry openly or concealed.

    If asked to leave by a property owner do so without argument and respect their right to do so.

    Carry responsibly,

    Ed Peruta

  7. #7
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by beanoboy7 View Post
    Rich,
    Isn't the DMV state property? Isn't that a BIG no-no?
    Since when? And by what statute?

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Hartford, Connecticut, United States
    Posts
    68
    It's what I've always been told. Unless you have permission from someone in the building farearms on state property isn't a good idea. Just like carrying on school property.

    I wish prohibited carry places was simplified, such as having a sign posted which few places have posted.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by beanoboy7 View Post
    It's what I've always been told.
    From who?

    Unless you have permission from someone in the building farearms on state property isn't a good idea. Just like carrying on school property.
    There is a statute against carrying in a school, no such thing exists for 'state buildings'. Also, schools are not usually state owned buildings.

    I wish prohibited carry places was simplified, such as having a sign posted which few places have posted.
    What prohibited place isn't posted?

    The list is simple. Anything not prohibited by statutes is legal.

  10. #10
    Regular Member S.Officer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    East Haven
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Peruta View Post
    If there is no law and/or no signs prohibiting firearms then it's ok to carry openly or concealed.

    If asked to leave by a property owner do so without argument and respect their right to do so.

    Carry responsibly,

    Ed Peruta

    Well Said...


    I think everyone should use their discretion.
    For me personally,I would not OC simply because I can.
    If someone seems alarmed by my Pistol even though
    there isn't any law or sign prohibiting...then I would
    conceal simply for the sake of Peace.

    If it's an LEO that doesn't know the laws...then I would
    conceal, and then ask the name of his supervisor and
    continue from there.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by S.Officer View Post
    For me personally,I would not OC simply because I can.
    So what other purpose is there to OC?

    "Because I can" sounds like a pretty plausible reason to do something lawful.

  12. #12
    Regular Member S.Officer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    East Haven
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich B View Post
    So what other purpose is there to OC?

    "Because I can" sounds like a pretty plausible reason to do something lawful.

    Yes it is a plausible reason...not saying I'll never OC...
    but I can only speak for me right now.

    I just use my discretion and "choose my battles"(where I want to OC).
    If I feel OC is absolutely necessary then I'd OC.


    I'm a female...and sometimes OC don't go well with some of our dress codes.
    Neither do Conceal. It's up to the Holder I guess!!!

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,543
    Quote Originally Posted by S.Officer View Post
    Yes it is a plausible reason...not saying I'll never OC...
    but I can only speak for me right now.

    I just use my discretion and "choose my battles"(where I want to OC).
    If I feel OC is absolutely necessary then I'd OC.


    I'm a female...and sometimes OC don't go well with some of our dress codes.
    Neither do Conceal. It's up to the Holder I guess!!!
    Why is it "choosing your battles."? Open carry is 100% legal. It makes no sense to conceal just to make someone feel better regardless of who they are. What "peace" are you keeping by covering your gun?Weren't you the one making a huge deal about open carrying on the train? Now you make it sound like OC is not important to you.
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  14. #14
    Regular Member S.Officer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    East Haven
    Posts
    21
    Why is it "choosing your battles."?
    My preference!! What's yours?

    Open carry is 100% legal.
    You couldn't be more right!!


    When at work OC is Mandatory for me.
    I have no say in how I would like to carry.
    Off Duty I have choices and those are the choices,
    I personally make.



    To carry or not to carry in a DMV building?
    Mr. Peruta said it best.
    Last edited by S.Officer; 07-16-2011 at 03:28 PM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Freiheit417's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    167
    Thanks to all for the responses, especially for confirming that the DMV's are still not posted "criminal safety zones."

    If I should find otherwise, I will be sure to let everyone know.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by S.Officer View Post
    My preference!! What's yours?


    You couldn't be more right!!


    When at work OC is Mandatory for me.
    I have no say in how I would like to carry.
    Off Duty I have choices and those are the choices,
    I personally make.



    To carry or not to carry in a DMV building?
    Mr. Peruta said it best.
    You spend too much time clouding the issue. I cannot tell if you are doing it intentionally or not.

    The last poster questioned you on your choice of wording which I agree is odd. Why is concealing 'keeping the peace' and 'choosing your battles'?

    What about OC creates a lack of peace and how is it a battle? It is nothing more than a carry choice. For me, it is a choice of whether I wear a cover shirt or not.

    To be clear, I don't think anyone here is encouraging you to carry, much less carrying openly or concealed. However, you are going out of your way to make odd wording choices with regards to something that you apparently have no interest in doing.
    Last edited by Rich B; 07-16-2011 at 06:44 PM.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Lenny Benedetto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    VP of CCDL, Inc., ,
    Posts
    470
    Do I see another TRAIN thread starting????
    I sure do miss that thread!!!! LOL!!

  18. #18
    Regular Member Freiheit417's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by Lenny Benedetto View Post
    Do I see another TRAIN thread starting????
    I sure do miss that thread!!!! LOL!!
    I surely hope it doesn't go in that direction....


    The goal in starting this thread was to establish:

    1) That DMV's in CT are still not posted "No Weapons/Firearms"

    and

    2) That no new laws have been enacted prohibiting carry in said places


    Given the latest DMV "reforms" that were passed this year, I wanted to make sure that weapons prohibitions did not get quietly inserted.

    These questions have been answered - many thanks again.

  19. #19
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    Quote Originally Posted by Lenny Benedetto View Post
    Do I see another TRAIN thread starting????
    I sure do miss that thread!!!! LOL!!
    IB4TL...... just sayin'.......

    Jonathan
    www.ctpistolpermitissues.com - tracking all the local issuing authority, DPS and other insanity with permit issues
    www.ctgunsafety.com - my blog and growing list of links useful to gun owners (especially in Connecticut).

    Rich B: My favorite argument against OC being legal in CT is "I have never seen someone OC in CT".
    I have never seen a person drink tea from a coke bottle while standing on their head, that doesn't mean it is illegal.

  20. #20
    Regular Member S.Officer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    East Haven
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Lenny Benedetto View Post
    Do I see another TRAIN thread starting????
    I sure do miss that thread!!!! LOL!!

    LOL...
    Nope...my fingers still hurt from that incident!

  21. #21
    Regular Member S.Officer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    East Haven
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Freiheit417 View Post
    I surely hope it doesn't go in that direction....


    The goal in starting this thread was to establish:

    1) That DMV's in CT are still not posted "No Weapons/Firearms"

    and

    2) That no new laws have been enacted prohibiting carry in said places


    Given the latest DMV "reforms" that were passed this year, I wanted to make sure that weapons prohibitions did not get quietly inserted.

    These questions have been answered - many thanks again.

    You don't have to worry about me hijacking your thread.
    I voiced my opinions and will keep it moving...
    Hope you get it figured out...
    By the way, I'm still allowed to OC on the train

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Old Saybrook, CT
    Posts
    469
    Quote Originally Posted by beanoboy7 View Post
    It's what I've always been told. Unless you have permission from someone in the building farearms on state property isn't a good idea. Just like carrying on school property.

    I wish prohibited carry places was simplified, such as having a sign posted which few places have posted.
    It is simple. VERY SIMPLE. The problem is that so much bad info has been passed and repeated that people just keep passing the wrong info.

    The statutes are simple. The state prohibits carry in the following places:

    1) in or on school property
    2) anywhere the legislature is meeting (see the statute for details)
    3) anywhere a property owner or controling authority has prohibited. (Including verbal requests to leave)

    Thats it. Nothing more. At least according to state law. The feds don't like guns in post offices. I also believe they don't like them in any federal buildings, but don't hold me to that.

    In sumary: carry whereever you want, whenever you want, however you want, except in primary or secondary schools.

    Don

  23. #23
    Regular Member Freiheit417's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by dcmdon View Post
    It is simple. VERY SIMPLE. The problem is that so much bad info has been passed and repeated that people just keep passing the wrong info.

    The statutes are simple. The state prohibits carry in the following places:

    1) in or on school property
    2) anywhere the legislature is meeting (see the statute for details)
    3) anywhere a property owner or controling authority has prohibited. (Including verbal requests to leave)

    Thats it. Nothing more. At least according to state law. The feds don't like guns in post offices. I also believe they don't like them in any federal buildings, but don't hold me to that.

    In sumary: carry whereever you want, whenever you want, however you want, except in primary or secondary schools.

    Don
    Agreed to an extent, but the problem with CT is #3. There is no language in the statutes outlining what constitutes reasonable notification that a property owner/controller has prohibited firearms. Is "No Weapons Allowed on Premise" printed in microscopic font on the back of an admission ticket legal notification? How about a "no firearms" rule posted on a company's website with no actual sign on the door?

    Several states have laws that specify proper notification:

    For example in Texas, a business must post a PC 30.06 compliant sign to keep out CHL holders who are armed.

    Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:
    (1) carries a handgun under the authority of Article 4413(29ee), Revised Statutes, on property of another without effective consent; and
    (2) received notice that:
    (A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or
    (B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.
    (b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.
    (c) In this section:
    (1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).
    (2) "License holder" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).
    (3) "Written communication" means:
    (A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Article 4413(29ee), Revised Statutes (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"; or
    (B) a sign posted on the property that:
    (i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
    (ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
    (iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.

    Don't get me wrong though, Texas' carry laws overall are certainly far from ideal. I think Wisconsin's language regarding carry and trespass may be a better model. I believe theirs provides immunity to businesses that DO NOT prohibit carry on the premise. I suspect liability has much to do with some businesses prohibiting carry. I know it's wishful thinking, but if CT could somehow get immunity in the law, some companies may not be as likely to prohibit.


    The CT DMV's do have TONS of other signs on the door and inside. I must have spent 15 minutes reading all of them. "Don't lean on or stand in front of this counter" was a good one...
    Harassing DMV employees is prohibited, and posted too.

    But alas, there were none prohibiting the lawful carry of firearms. Woo hoo!
    Last edited by Freiheit417; 07-22-2011 at 09:56 PM.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Old Saybrook, CT
    Posts
    469
    Actually, the presence of a sign isn't even enough.

    There was a situation in CT where an OCer was asked to remove a gun in a town hall durring a public meeting of some sort. He refused.

    A few days later when entering the town hall he noticed a "no guns" sign had been posted. He tracked down the author of the sign to be a person with no authority over real estate or other facilities.

    It was eventually taken down if I remember correctly.

  25. #25
    Regular Member Freiheit417's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    167
    Quote Originally Posted by dcmdon View Post
    Actually, the presence of a sign isn't even enough.

    There was a situation in CT where an OCer was asked to remove a gun in a town hall durring a public meeting of some sort. He refused.

    A few days later when entering the town hall he noticed a "no guns" sign had been posted. He tracked down the author of the sign to be a person with no authority over real estate or other facilities.

    It was eventually taken down if I remember correctly.

    This situation (or very a similar one) happened in Plymouth, CT. "JUMPMASTER" posted on this, unless you are referring to a different incident.

    A sign did go up afterwards and is still there. I think there may indeed be some question as to who has authority over the town hall/police station building in Plymouth. Nevertheless, the sign remains AFAIK unless it has been removed in the last couple weeks.

    If JUMPMASTER is reading, perhaps he could speak to this better. I have read his excellent postings on OCDO regarding the incident as well as his letter(s) to the editor in the town newspaper. I would love to hear if there are any updates.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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