Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26

Thread: Torrington Connecticut Police Department Roll Call Training on OPEN and CONCEAL CARRY

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

    Torrington Connecticut Police Department Roll Call Training on OPEN and CONCEAL CARRY

    To all who read this post,

    Listen to this audio clip of the recent oral arguments at the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York and then read the training document from Torrington P.D. in PDF format at the end of this post.
    Here is the audio link: http://www.ctgunrights.com/0.2nd.Cir...11.21.2011.wmv

    Not all encounters with law enforcement turn out bad and sometimes good things happen. I will post more on this topic later, but want to provide this public document to as many individuals as possible. Print it and keep it folded and in your wallet or purse, it really is a very informative public record.

    A previous encounter and informative discussion with two plainclothes openly carrying officers from the Torrington Police Department on East Main Street in Torrington, (where the Goldberg case became a topic), seems to have led to this Roll Call Training document being drafted.

    At the time of the discussion, I was openly carrying in a Mobile gas stations/Dunkin Donuts and was provided with the opportunity to discuss my position with both officers. I later paid a visit to Torrington Police Headquarters and followed up with a ranking member of the Department who had an open mind on the subject of Connecticut Firearm laws.

    This document was obtained on December 2, 2011 from the Torrington Police Department in response to a request made to the Sgt. in their records Department.


    Personally I am extremely pleased with the Torrington Police Department and how they have taken the steps necessary to properly inform the members of their department on the topic of Permits to Carry Pistols or Revolvers in the State of Connecticut.

    The training memo is extremely direct and offers plain language guidance to members of the Torrington Police Department who can now properly handle situations with those who choose to carry firearms openly or concealed in CT.


    Here is the scanned text version of the document I was provided with today:

    Torrington Police Department - Roll Call Training (09/2011)

    Connecticut Pistol Permit Clarification

    Some questions have recently arisen in regards to the right of an individual who possesses a valid state pistol permit to carry his/her firearm in plain view. (Open carry verses Concealed carry.)

    None of the Connecticut State Statues indicate that a person who possesses a valid state permit must conceal the firearm they are carrying. Connecticut is not a traditional open carry state. Outside of your own residence or place of business, a permit is required to carry. The permit that Connecticut issues is a carry permit, not a concealed carry permit, so open carry IS legal with a permit.

    The large majority of permit holders carry firearms in a concealed manner, as not to bring attention to themselves or alarm those not aware of the law.

    Many State and Local Police Officers are not well versed on the law in this area.

    People have been arrested for Breach of Peace or Disorderly Conduct in the past for open carry of their firearm because doing so created "alarm ,annoyance or inconvenience", as quoted from the state statutes.

    However, one must reason that:

    If the open carry of a firearm by a valid permit holder is legal; and another person or persons are alarmed, annoyed or inconvenienced because they are unaware that the permit holder is exercising his legal right to carry his weapon unconcealed; this in itself would NOT constitute a crime on the part of the permit holder.

    The permit does not infringe upon public or private entities from banning firearms from certain areas. The banning of firearms (Concealed or Open View) can and is banned in many public buildings, sports stadiums, school grounds, etc.

    If valid permit holder has a firearm on his person (Concealed or not) and is in a public or private place that prohibits firearms; that person should be made aware of the prohibition and asked to leave. They may secure their weapon and return. If the person refuses to leave and still has the weapon on their person this would be a criminal trespass violation.
    , , ',~ .
    ** Note: The vast majority of permit holders carry firearms daily without any problems or interaction with law enforcement. There may be some individuals out in public at this time purposely carrying their weapons in an open fashion to test or bait police officers who are unfamiliar with the law into arresting them, so they may bring civil action against the officers and state or municipality.

    **Officer and Public Safety always comes first.*· Having a good knowledge of the laws will help in this situation. Officers may still detain a person carrying a firearm to ascertain if that person has a valid permit. If this is the case and there is no other violation, the person is free to leave. If that person is acting in a manner that violates any other laws or ordinances, appropriate action should be taken. A professional response without overreaction will go a long way in these situations.

    Captain Francis T. Balzano #302
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by Edward Peruta; 12-03-2011 at 09:04 AM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Norwich, CT
    Posts
    34
    Read it bt didn't listen yet. That's really great, we are making headway!

  3. #3
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Good work Ed.

    A great first step for Torrington.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Freiheit417's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    167
    I personally witnessed a Torrington police officer go too far in March 2010.

    A man was standing on the street corner next to Coe Park downtown at a Tea Party Rally. When he bent down to tap in a sign on the ground, his pistol became inadvertently exposed. Upon seeing that, the officer leapt from his car, grabbed the individual and removed the man's pistol from his waistband. The officer took custody of the pistol and his permit and left the area to go to the PD HQ.

    I knew the man would have been under arrest on the spot if he didn't have a permit. So, I went over to him to have a chat since what I witnessed didn't seem quite right.

    He told me that the officer took his pistol and permit and that he was going to have his permit revoked. He also said he was going to persue charges for BOP or Disorderly (forget which). Apparently, someone (perhaps a supervisor) educated him a bit, because the officer eventually had him come down to HQ to pick up his permit and pistol.

    Hopefully this policy will prevent such an overreaction again, but this part is still a bit concerning "Officers may still detain a person carrying a firearm to ascertain if that person has a valid permit." IIRC, the State Police memo from the 2nd Amendment rally stated that someone openly carrying should not be detained unless there is a crime being investigated, i.e. open carry by itself does not give reason. If they don't abuse this policy and use ample discretion, then perhaps open carriers will not be unduly harassed. Time will tell.

    Anyhow, progress is good so the Torrington PD does deserve kudos. Thank you Captain Balzano!
    America, where freedom* reigns.

    *Freedom subject to change depending on jurisdiction and availability. Some freedoms may not be available due to local political expedience or prevailing political correctness. Please check Federal, State, County, City, or any other special district for applicable laws governing the extents of freedoms prior to purchase.

    -----------

    “What you see is the fringe of the fringe showing up in Hartford today." - Danny Malloy a.k.a. "The Governor" 3/11/2013

  5. #5
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Freiheit417 View Post
    Hopefully this policy will prevent such an overreaction again, but this part is still a bit concerning "Officers may still detain a person carrying a firearm to ascertain if that person has a valid permit." IIRC, the State Police memo from the 2nd Amendment rally stated that someone openly carrying should not be detained unless there is a crime being investigated, i.e. open carry by itself does not give reason. If they don't abuse this policy and use ample discretion, then perhaps open carriers will not be unduly harassed. Time will tell.
    I agree, but this is a good first step. The ID issue will be solved later, as they are clearly wrong.

    Look at it this way. They have now admitted that they understand that there is no crime to associate with the mere act of carrying a firearm unconcealed. They have acknowledged that any 'alarm' or 'annoyance' caused by a legal activity is also not a crime.

    So what RAS would they use to detain you in the first place? They are only opening themselves up to liability, but at least it is their liability, not yours.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Snohomish County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Peruta View Post
    There may be some individuals out in public at this time purposely carrying their weapons in an open fashion to test or bait police officers who are unfamiliar with the law into arresting them, so they may bring civil action against the officers and state or municipality.
    That is really very good, apart from this quoted section. Is there any evidence to believe this is the case?
    Hoplophobia is a social disease.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Nobody is looking for trouble or confrontations

    Quote Originally Posted by geojohn View Post
    That is really very good, apart from this quoted section. Is there any evidence to believe this is the case?
    I know of no individual who is seeking to bait members of law enforcement while carrying openly.

    I do know that there are several individuals in CT who OPEN CARRY and DO NOT back down when confronted and threatened.

    Hopefully the time is approaching where we will be able to carry OPENLY or CONCEALED without fear of arrests and revocations.

    I have just posted the Wethersfield Police Training Memo and believe that one or more other departments will follow suit shortly.

    The Torrington Memo is very clear and to the point.



    Ed Peruta
    Last edited by Edward Peruta; 12-05-2011 at 04:57 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Snohomish County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Peruta View Post
    I know of no individual who is seeking to bait members of law enforcement while carrying openly.
    Nor do I, anywhere. If you get a chance to talk to Cpt. Balzano, you might want to discuss this issue with an aim of getting it removed. He sounds quite reasonable.
    Hoplophobia is a social disease.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by geojohn View Post
    That is really very good, apart from this quoted section. Is there any evidence to believe this is the case?
    I know of plenty of people who do not conceal their firearms. I do not know of any that 'bait' officers. I know that is certainly not the reason I open carry.

    However, I must ask, even if they were out to 'bait' officers, so what? I don't understand why people are always talking about this with regards to open carry like it is relevant or validates a person's decision in how to carry.
    It seems to me that people who accuse open carriers of 'baiting' the police are people who don't understand cause and effect.

    Supposing there was someone who thought they could get rich off of suing police departments for arresting them for OC (ignoring the piles and piles of evidence to the contrary), this would still be ignoring the fact that police officers and police officers alone control how they act and react with regards to law abiding citizens. If police officers are worried about people 'baiting them' by engaging in lawful activity, they should not violate those people's rights in the first place. Pretty simple. Know the laws. Know the constitution (they were sworn to uphold it, were they not?). Leave people alone if they are not hurting anyone or infringing on anyone's rights (this would be helpful in many other aspects of law enforcement as well but I digress).

    Again, I have yet to hear of any people who actually holster up a firearm everyday hoping to be arrested so they can sue, although I can think of one that might be a possibility in another state. But I don't understand why people give any emphasis to this. It is irrelevant in any legal sense. It does, however, tend to illustrate the general 'them vs us' mentality that many LEOs unfortunately learn or adopt towards citizens and especially OCers. It is an unfortunate attitude, but it is one that we can hopefully change over time.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Connecticut USA
    Posts
    1,247

    Be prepared for any backlash

    To every action their is a reaction.

    Everyone who finds these acknowledgments by local law enforcement refreshing should stay on their toes and expect the reaction.

    I predict that as more and more local law enforcement agencies and politicians become aware of the fact that Open Carry is lawful, moves will be made in the Connecticut State Legislature to amend the law to mandate Concealment.

    The struggle to define our Federal and State Rights to keep and bear arms for SELF DEFENSE is far from over.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    connecticut
    Posts
    125
    So I suppose the supreme courts statement that open carry is constituionally protected and concealed carry isnt doesnt really matter.

    http://opencarry.org/Press/June-29-08.pdf

  12. #12
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by smokeyburnout View Post
    So I suppose the supreme courts statement that open carry is constituionally protected and concealed carry isnt doesnt really matter.

    http://opencarry.org/Press/June-29-08.pdf
    Oh, it will, but we have to be prepared to fight.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    connecticut
    Posts
    125
    I should clairify as well. Last paragraph of the firt page in the link i added...
    "Last week the United States Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment secures the right
    to keep and bear (i.e, "carry") arms (3), including handguns. (4) But the Court also acknowledged
    previously stated holding in many cases that there is no constitutional right to carry “concealed”
    handguns. (5) By implication, the right to carry handguns openly is constitutionally protected, and
    even a licensure scheme for open carry is Constitutionally suspect. (6)"

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1

    Concealed Carry or Open Carry?

    The questions that I have about this case are as follows:

    If the Gun Carrier did not have any training or felt that open carrying would cause annoyance or perception of a threat would he have been in fact guilty of Breach of Peace. It sounded like the case was made that because he had been told that open carrying could be deemed a threat and that he had tried to cover the handgun with his t-shirt he was conscious of the perceived threat. This made it a deliberate act. If he had said that I know that my rights allow me to carry openly in the state of CT. and that I did not realize that it would be interpreted at a threat, would that have cleared him of a deliberate act?

    Secondly:

    If the CT. carry permit is not a concealed carry permit and we are not allowed to carry openly because it can be deemed a threat just by the fact that someone might feel threatened, is it a true carry permit. In what way are we allowed to carry a firearm, other then stored and locked?

    It does drive me crazy that a Lawful act by a majority can be deemed unlawful based on the a "feeling" of the minority. "I feel threaten...then I am threatened." In other parts of the country open carry is allowed and practiced so there is no alarm when someone is seen open carrying and acting in a non threatening manner. It is similar to saying Guns kill people...no people kill people. Guns do not threaten...people threaten. In this case the gun carrier was not acting in a threaten manner. In fact it sounded like he was just acting like a non carrying individual, but because the manager was nervous, she was allowed to discriminate against this individual and treat them as a criminal.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    It all simply amounts to normalization. If more responsible and diligent people would stop concealing, word would be getting out faster.

    The towns that know or are in litigation only happened because people openly carried there. The conversation has been pushed from "SWAT teams will appear and you will be arrested and your gun and permit will be confiscated" to "Why should they be able to detain or ID me if they have no RAS?".

    This isn't magic. This is progress.

    Wallingford arrested me on the spot and laughed at my knowledge of the laws compared to theirs even though they were 100% wrong.

    Old Saybrook detained me and (hopefully) learned some things.

    New Haven yelled at me and acted foolish but refused to even detain me.

    Meriden won't even acknowledge my existence.

    The rest of the towns I am in I have no affirmative data, but I spend lots of time in many of them and simply have had no contact. I have certainly never seen anyone panic or flee in terror or any of the other numerous lies I hear continually. That experience is shared by the other OC states I watch in 'Stories from the States' on OCDO.



    If we want to keep pushing this ball, we need to band together and carry openly. It is working. We just cannot get lazy or complacent now. We might be coming to a summit one of these days. That summit may involve the silly DPS concealment mandate attempts they try every year. They list people actually utilizing their rights as one of the reasons they believe the law should be changed.

    But here is the thing:

    We are in this now. Do we all relax from it and let DPS do whatever they want to do? Or do we all get together and push harder than ever?

    Do we want the majority of the people out there to have experience with people carrying openly who held doors open for them, smiled and nodded politely? Or do we want the voting public to get their information from people like Lawlor, Lt Vance and the DPS?

    Remember, they have yet to actually cite a single public safety hazard that stems from open carry. They base it all on "Guns are icky!" and the associated silly rhetoric the Brady campaign has been spouting about for decades.

    We need to show people that open carry is here, it is here to stay, and that the people who choose not to conceal are honest, trustworthy, polite and professional in their business. We need to show them that open carry is not about being 'in your face' or about frightening anyone like Lawlor wants people to believe.

    I say the time is now to push harder than ever. We all need to spend the winter (when OC is not as typical or normal looking) doing our best to get the word out there with the people.

  16. #16
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    I agree with what you say Rich, but.....

    They can also throw in the most recent Goldberg verdict if they want to act shady.

    Just playin' Devil's advocate here..... but still......

    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.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    They can also throw in the most recent Goldberg verdict if they want to act shady.
    I am unclear as to what you are asserting here.

    What are you saying they can do, and how would they use the Goldberg verdict to justify it?

    The Goldberg (non opinion) verdict did not make the police officer's actions that day any more righteous and it certainly does not protect future officers from future lawsuits from individuals that have had their rights violated.

    Hell, Goldberg's case wasn't even about 'open carry'. It was about inadvertent printing. The burdens of RAS and PC have been ruled on differently depending on whether someone is clearly and knowingly OCing or CCing and printing.

  18. #18
    Regular Member KIX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    960
    More like they can do wrong, and use Goldberg to justify it. Not sayin' it's right, either.

    The waters between printing and open carrying are often muddied up in this state. I see issues of "printing" at the BFPE hearings, the boards usual response is like, so what, open carry is legal.

    I see the reverse with Goldberg and the hearings and so much talk of open carry, yet he was printing.

    Just saying, the mixing of the two really doesn't help us much as far as a LEO harassing us much.

    Not that I think many are going to be up with the current events of Goldberg, mind you..... But, with google as your friend, I can see someone sitting behind a desk, radioing to an officer in the field and say "see, look what happened in this here Goldberg case".....

    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.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by KIX View Post
    Not that I think many are going to be up with the current events of Goldberg, mind you..... But, with google as your friend, I can see someone sitting behind a desk, radioing to an officer in the field and say "see, look what happened in this here Goldberg case".....
    Well since this thread is about Torrington explicitly training their officers against this kind of BS, I would say "So what?".

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich B View Post
    The burdens of RAS and PC have been ruled on differently depending on whether someone is clearly and knowingly OCing or CCing and printing.
    What cases are you referring to here? Your's and Goldberg's, or are there more? How does inadvertent exposure or printing give a cop more or different RAS than straight-up OC? What's your take on someone who goes into Walmart wearing an OWB Holster and a coat (CC), get's hot, takes coat off and is now OC?

  21. #21
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by larch View Post
    What cases are you referring to here?
    How does inadvertent exposure or printing give a cop more or different RAS than straight-up OC?
    ETA: Found it:
    Quote Originally Posted by GEORGIACARRY.ORG, INC. v METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY
    When a person is carrying a firearm openly, reasonable suspicion of unlawful activity must obviously involve some unlawful act other than the crime of boarding with a concealed weapon or the crime of carrying a concealed weapon.
    The core of the argument is essentially that concealed carry *may* produce RAS if the gun becomes visible since criminals are known to carry concealed. Also remember that it is pretty widely accepted through history and court rulings that concealed carry is a 'less honest' form of carry.

    Open carry is not a practice that criminals are known to engage in. Therefore it is less than reasonable for anyone to assume that a person carrying a fully exposed firearm in a proper holster is engaged in any sort of criminal behavior from the gun alone. The courts have even mentioned that open carry is likely to be the constitutional minimum (standard?) for carry outside of the home.

    What's your take on someone who goes into Walmart wearing an OWB Holster and a coat (CC), get's hot, takes coat off and is now OC?
    I don't see an issue with it at all, although I have seen firsthand that people seem to react a slight bit more (still no panic, terror or anything, mostly just double takes) when a gun suddenly appears on your waist band where it wasn't before. I think that is simply because it is surprising to people that don't conceal that a (fullsize?) firearm can be concealed on your person and that they have been 'fooled'.

    I think this more applies to things like carrying openly in something like an IWB holster. Hell, I have heard of people carrying a pistol in their pocket that hangs out just to open carry. The argument has been that this tends to skew things towards RAS because it closely resembles how a criminal would carry by all outside appearances.

    When I open carry, I either go full open carry, or concealed means concealed. It would be rare for me to be seen in public with a pistol grip hanging out of my waist band.
    Last edited by Rich B; 12-20-2011 at 10:24 AM.

  22. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    I am not a teacher. If a cop wishes to engage in unlawful activities then he is going to learn the hard way.

  23. #23
    Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    georgia
    Posts
    1

    edwart peruta

    Great to here your situation turned out the way it did. Unfourtunaly, for my son, things didn't go as well. He was traveling through Connecticut late 7-16-15 or early 7-17-15 on his way to Rhode Island , which is my home state. He stopped to gas up in Fairfield which is near Bridgeport. He has a Georiga carry permit, but before entering the store, to prevent any uncomfortable feeling from employees or patrons, he removed his handgun from its holster but did not remove his holster. Someone obviously called police and before he could finish gasing up 6 officers approached him guns drawn. His fiance and he 2 young daughters were terrified. He was arrested and his firearms confiscated. He has a court appearance schedule for 7-30-15 and we need help or advice. Anyone please feel free to contact me via email.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    06076
    Posts
    66
    Quote Originally Posted by deonesmith542 View Post
    Great to here your situation turned out the way it did. Unfourtunaly, for my son, things didn't go as well. He was traveling through Connecticut late 7-16-15 or early 7-17-15 on his way to Rhode Island , which is my home state. He stopped to gas up in Fairfield which is near Bridgeport. He has a Georiga carry permit, but before entering the store, to prevent any uncomfortable feeling from employees or patrons, he removed his handgun from its holster but did not remove his holster. Someone obviously called police and before he could finish gasing up 6 officers approached him guns drawn. His fiance and he 2 young daughters were terrified. He was arrested and his firearms confiscated. He has a court appearance schedule for 7-30-15 and we need help or advice. Anyone please feel free to contact me via email.
    I am sorry to hear about your son's trouble, but it doesn't sound like his situation is going to end well. This thread is quite old to be brought back.

    Unfortunately CT does not reciprocate with any other state and unless your son had a CT permit, he was in the wrong. The empty holster *shouldnt* have gotten him arrested, but he also shouldn't have had his weapon out, knowing that he was not permitted in CT. I cannot say I agree with the laws as they are, but that is what we have to live with today. The better choice for traveling would have been to secure the unloaded weapon in the trunk while passing through states which one is not permitted to carry in.

    I have little to no experience as i am still waiting for my permit, but I am under the impression that carry (open or concealed) in CT has become easier in the past few years.

  25. #25
    Regular Member brk913's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Plainville, CT
    Posts
    370
    Unfortunately what adk_mechetech says is correct. CT does not honor any other state's permit and in CT you need a permit to carry and if a CT resident even to transport your handgun, had he had it stored properly per FOPA he would be in better shape legally, the fact he was "carrying" a loaded gun in his car that was "accessible" and wearing an empty holster is pretty damning evidence of Carrying a Pistol without a Permit, CGS 29-35: http://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/ch....htm#sec_29-35
    Member:, NRA Patron Life, NSSF, CCDL, CT Carry, MRPC and Bell City
    NRA Certified Instructor, Chief Range Safety Officer - Basic Pistol, Home Firearm Safety, Metallic Cartridge/Shotgun Shell Reloading - www.ctpistolpermit.com

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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