Picking a fight with Hartford.....

So, you all know the issues I'm working on regarding suitability and the towns.

Well, here is the status with Hartford.

Hartford still thinks they can deny issuing paperwork at the window when someone asks. Clear violation of part of CGS 29-28a:

Upon written request by any person for a temporary state permit not on a prescribed application form, or upon
request by any person for such application form, the local authority shall supply such forms. When any such request is
made in person at the office of the local authority, the local authority shall supply such application form immediately.

The following is shorthand notes from my phone conversation (not the best English, but notes):

Hartford doesn't have to abide by 29-28a
They have a policy that clearly states that they do not have to do this
If a person arrives with their application complete, they will be denied dropping off the application because he can't do a background investigation because they don't have the information on the handout the town provides.
Assistance from an instructor in filling out an application is cause for denial based on suitability because if "they can't fill out a simple application, they should be denied".
Regardless whether I'm a notary or not.... he says they can come to class, get app, go back to instructor for notary

******

So, it's OK for them to preempt the law.

The fight continues. I'll let ya'll know where we are when I get updates.

Jonathan

Why do we not file charges against them with the state's attorney after documenting them denying a resident the paper work with video and audio recording?

So wait a minute...

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/pub/chap529.htm#Sec29-28a.htm said:

Sec. 29-28a. Application for permit. Notice of decision to applicant. (a) Requests for temporary state permits under section 29-28 shall be submitted to the chief of police, or, where there is no chief of police, to the warden of the borough or the first selectman of the town, as the case may be, on application forms prescribed by the Commissioner of Public Safety. Upon written request by any person for a temporary state permit not on a prescribed application form, or upon request by any person for such application form, the local authority shall supply such forms. When any such request is made in person at the office of the local authority, the local authority shall supply such application form immediately. When any such request is made in any other manner, the local authority shall supply such application form not later than one week after receiving such request. If such application form is not supplied within the time limits required by this section, the request therefor shall constitute a sufficient application. If any local authority fails to supply an application form upon the request of any person, such person may request an application form from the Commissioner of Public Safety or any barracks of the Division of State Police, and the time limits and procedures set forth in this section for handling requests for such forms shall be applicable.

(b) The local authority shall, not later than eight weeks after a sufficient application for a temporary state permit has been made, inform the applicant that such applicant's request for a temporary state permit has been approved or denied. The local authority shall forward a copy of the application indicating approval or denial of the temporary state permit to the Commissioner of Public Safety. If the local authority has denied the application for a temporary state permit, no state permit may be issued. The commissioner shall, not later than eight weeks after receiving an application indicating approval from the local authority, inform the applicant in writing that the applicant's application for a state permit has been approved or denied, or that the results of the national criminal history records check have not been received. If grounds for denial become known after a temporary state permit has been obtained, the temporary state permit shall be immediately revoked pursuant to section 29-32.

Click to expand...

Doesn't this mean that if you document this and supply it to the DPS, they have to issue you your permit, much like an eligibility certificate?

Essentially you mail them a certified copy (return receipt requested for the applicants protection).

8 weeks later, this is an instant denial.

As far as DPS goes, I'm awaiting a call back from them now.

The only additional problem I can see here is:

a citizen goes to the PD for an app, they say no unless he has training. I give them form in class, they drop of app and are denied. Send it certified and nothing happens after eight weeks. Then you go for an appeal hearing. Get a date and find out that it will take longer as no fingerprints were taken for the federal requirements.

Just a thought,

Jonathan

Read all of the statute

Sec. 29-28a. Application for permit. Notice of decision to applicant. (a) Requests for temporary state permits under section 29-28 shall be submitted to the chief of police, or, where there is no chief of police, to the warden of the borough or the first selectman of the town, as the case may be, on application forms prescribed by the Commissioner of Public Safety. Upon written request by any person for a temporary state permit not on a prescribed application form, or upon request by any person for such application form, the local authority shall supply such forms. When any such request is made in person at the office of the local authority, the local authority shall supply such application form immediately. When any such request is made in any other manner, the local authority shall supply such application form not later than one week after receiving such request. If such application form is not supplied within the time limits required by this section, the request therefor shall constitute a sufficient application. If any local authority fails to supply an application form upon the request of any person, such person may request an application form from the Commissioner of Public Safety or any barracks of the Division of State Police, and the time limits and procedures set forth in this section for handling requests for such forms shall be applicable.

With the completed application obtained from the State Police:

Have your fingerprints taken by the State Police in Middletown and submit a copy with the application by certified mail to the local issuing authority.

Rich B said:

Why do we not file charges against them with the state's attorney after documenting them denying a resident the paper work with video and audio recording?

Click to expand...

I discussed this same thing with a fellow instructor. The problem is we do not have standing to sue, only the person who was denied the application will be able to pursue this. For the most part I have found that first time applicants don't like to "rock the boat" and just submit to whatever the issuing authority throws their way. However, one good monetary spanking for violating civil rights usually fixes the problem.

I agree with Ed and Rich, hence why I'm making a follow up with DPS so I can also post information on my website. Though I can do this now, I'd like to see what DPSP thinks on the issue.

Regarding the issue BRK913 brings up, I'm thinking of going the other route. As an instructor, it impacts me and I teach people in the Hartford area.

Jonathan

KIX said:

Regarding the issue BRK913 brings up, I'm thinking of going the other route. As an instructor, it impacts me and I teach people in the Hartford area.

Jonathan

Click to expand...

I can't see you getting standing in any type of lawsuit even as an instructor for Hartford residents. The fact that they will not give out the application prior to class participation does not affect instructors economically or otherwise and the statute you would be trying to enforce states only a resident of the city or business owner in the city can apply at HPD. The only people who would have a chance are residents of Hartford who are denied an application.

If you can get standing to sue Hartford it would open up for instructors to be able to sue every town who violates the permit process of their students, I just don't see it happening.

brk913 said:

I can't see you getting standing in any type of lawsuit even as an instructor for Hartford residents. The fact that they will not give out the application prior to class participation does not affect instructors economically or otherwise

Click to expand...

An argument can be made against that statement as classes aren't free

brk913 said:

the statute you would be trying to enforce states only a resident of the city or business owner in the city can apply at HPD.

Click to expand...

Where does the statute say that?

brk913 said:

If you can get standing to sue Hartford it would open up for instructors to be able to sue every town who violates the permit process of their students, I just don't see it happening.

Click to expand...

And that would be a bad thing why? It would force all 169 fiefdoms to start following state law (unless suitability ends soon).

I would prefer ending suitability, but.....

Jonathan

Kix,

"Get a date and find out that it will take longer as no fingerprints were taken for the federal requirements."

Which Federal requirements are these? The reason I'm curious is because here in NH there are no fingerprints required to obtain your pistol license.

Best regards.

KIX said:

An argument can be made against that statement as classes aren't free

Click to expand...

This does not make sense, you make no more money if they are able to pick up the application ahead of time or not.

KIX said:

Where does the statute say that?

Click to expand...

29-28 (b)Upon the application of any person having a bona fide residence or place of business within the jurisdiction of any such authority,

KIX said:

And that would be a bad thing why? It would force all 169 fiefdoms to start following state law (unless suitability ends soon).

I would prefer ending suitability, but.....

Jonathan

Click to expand...

Did not say it would be bad thing, in fact I think you've got me all wrong on this issue. I am just saying it's not likely that you would be able to sue or claim an infringerment of your civil rights as instructors lack standing to be wronged by the permit process.

Tactical9mm said:

Kix,

"Get a date and find out that it will take longer as no fingerprints were taken for the federal requirements."

Which Federal requirements are these? The reason I'm curious is because here in NH there are no fingerprints required to obtain your pistol license.

Best regards.

Click to expand...

It's not a federal requirement, it's a state requirement which allows them to verify your identity for both state and federal background checks which are mandated by CT law.

Thanks for the clarification.

Tactical - what he said!

BRK - where are you quoting 29-28b from?

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/pub/chap529.htm#Sec29-28a.htm (b is, of course, below it).

Part a deals with getting the application, part b deals with granting the permit. Still trying to see where you're going here.

*****

Makes perfect sense as helping understand the process and notarizing the form are part of the services provided in my classes (there are always questions the students would like to ask that they are afraid to bring up to the locals for fear of bias). So, I still think it's a vitally important part of the services provided. Can they go elsewhere, sure. But that going elsewhere is also part of a solid argument for loss of income based on a city not following state law.

*****

On a more practical note:

Nothing says I can't offer a friend a course as a gift and if he has issues.........

I'm just sayin'

Jonathan

KIX said:

Tactical - what he said!

BRK - where are you quoting 29-28b from?

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/pub/chap529.htm#Sec29-28a.htm (b is, of course, below it).

Part a deals with getting the application, part b deals with granting the permit. Still trying to see where you're going here.

*****

Makes perfect sense as helping understand the process and notarizing the form are part of the services provided in my classes (there are always questions the students would like to ask that they are afraid to bring up to the locals for fear of bias). So, I still think it's a vitally important part of the services provided. Can they go elsewhere, sure. But that going elsewhere is also part of a solid argument for loss of income based on a city not following state law.

*****

On a more practical note:

Nothing says I can't offer a friend a course as a gift and if he has issues.........

I'm just sayin'

Jonathan

Click to expand...

Wrong statute, I am refering to section b in 29-28 (not 29-28a): http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/pub/chap529.htm#Sec29-28.htm

As refered to in the section you linked here: Sec. 29-28a. Application for permit. Notice of decision to applicant. (a) Requests for temporary state permits under section 29-28 shall be submitted to the chief of police

So, section 29-28a tells you to request a temp permit as authorized under 29-28 which states under section b: (b) Upon the application of any person having a bona fide residence or place of business within the jurisdiction of any such authority

This is to stop people from applying in any town they want, they must reside or own a business in the town in which they apply. So where I am going here is that if a town is breaking the rules the only person who would be directly affected (a resident or business owner within the town) would have standing for any type of suit or case against the town for a violation of the permit process as governed by state statute.

Once again, I too go over the application and discuss the entire permit process during my class but the fact that Hartford refuses to give out an application prior to class completion does not affect me as an instructor, not financially or otherwise. I have plenty of students from Hartford every month so it is not stopping them from taking the class, it just inconveiences them as they usually have to make 3 or more trips to HPD.

Again, I am not defending Hartford's actions, however, as an instructor you will never prove that their "policy" affects you thus no standing for you to file a grievance or lawsuit. As you mentioned above, "would this be a bad thing?" Of course not, if instructors were allowed to financially go after each town who did not follow the letter of the law we would have a state full of towns who would jump into compliance as no town or city wants to be handing out cash because they can't follow the rules. That being said I encourage my students to "fight back" and try to make the issuing authorities follow the law, I provide them the statutes as well as the BOFPE Declaratory Ruling showing there is no need for added documentation. Most of my students simply submit to the erroneous requirements but I have has some push back especially on the "letters of reference" issue.

I'm afraid the only way we will get all these issues dealt with is by something you have mentioned several times, first and foremost removing the suitability requirement as it is way to subjective and varies from person to person and town to town. Second, it's time to cut the locals out of the permit process, I know it is a money maker for them but as the majority are not following the rules and they are making it more of a headache than it's worth for both the applicant and themselves, wasting LE time by interviewing your neighbors and employers and running various checks on people outside the DPS and FBI criminal check is just a waste of manpower and money, the town gets $70, does that cover the cost of tieing up a LEO or civilian police employee for who knows how many hours per applicant, I think not.

I know legislation was brought up last year to try to help standardize tha application process but it my opinion it went no where near far enough. You want the town's to follow the law? Put a big penalty in the statute for non compliance, something to the effect of, "If the issuing authority violates these statutes or time frames provided herein they must reimburse the applicant for all fees collected and pay a $5,000 fee to the applicant in punitive damages." Boy would that get the fire moving, I have said this before but it's worth mentioning again, Windsor issues permits in 3 days to 2 weeks, if they can do it all towns can, there simply is no excuse.

I think you are misinterpreting requesting an application and upon application - two very different things.

29-28a is clear as far as requesting paperwork. There is no exception, the application must be furnished.

Upon application is when the application is submitted and processed by the local issuing authority.

Jonathan

Here's the problem. When push comes to shove the local authority is the only organization with the licensingnauthority to issue a temporary permit. Sure the BFPE couldnorder the pd to issue. But the PD can and has ignored this request.

The only solution is to

1. Eliminate the local PD from the process. Like with a nonresident permit.
2. Empower the BFPE to issue pistol permits under certain circumstances

3. Eliminate the permit process altogether.

good point.

Yep. Suitability is the key (and getting rid of it).

However, there was a case where a town refused to issue a permit, even went to court.

I want to say Derby, but I could be wrong.

Jonathan