REQUIREMENTS FOR A TEMPORARY STATE PERMIT TO CARRY A PISTOL

Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2012 5:30 pm

AN ACT CONCERNING THE APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR A TEMPORARY STATE PERMIT TO CARRY A PISTOL OR REVOLVER.

To specify uniform criteria for an application for a temporary state permit to carry a pistol or revolver.

Introduced by: Public Safety and Security Committee

http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus/cgabillstatus.asp?selBillType=Bill&

bill_num=HB05245&which_year=2012

AN ACT CONCERNING THE APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR A TEMPORARY STATE PERMIT TO CARRY A PISTOL OR REVOLVER.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:

Section 1. Section 29-28a of the general statutes is repealed and the following is substituted in lieu thereof (Effective October 1, 2012):

(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 an application [forms] form prescribed by the Commissioner of Emergency Services and Public Protection. 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] application form. 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 Emergency Services and Public Protection 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) An applicant for a temporary state permit shall provide the issuing authority the following: (1) A completed and notarized application on the form prescribed by the Commissioner of Emergency Services and Public Protection pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, which form may not be modified or supplemented with additional forms; (2) proof of lawful presence in the United States consisting of (A) for citizens of the United States, a birth certificate, naturalization certificate or valid United States passport, or (B) for aliens, a permanent resident card; (3) a certificate of successful completion of a course in the safety and use of pistols and revolvers signed by an instructor certified by the National Rifle Association, the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, a law enforcement agency or a branch of the military service of the United States; and (4) two sets of fingerprints for purposes of section 29-29.

[(b)] (c) 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 Emergency Services and Public Protection. 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.

This act shall take effect as follows and shall amend the following sections:

Section 1

October 1, 2012

29-28a

Statement of Purpose:

To specify uniform criteria for an application for a temporary state permit to carry a pistol or revolver.

[Proposed deletions are enclosed in brackets. Proposed additions are indicated by underline, except that when the entire text of a bill or resolution or a section of a bill or resolution is new, it is not underlined.]

Marksman V Joined: Dec 15, 2010 Posts: 109

If I read this correctly, this mean no more extra forms other than the state form to fill out, and very specific time limits. This will definitely be good if it passes.

I'll probably start a flamewar because of this comment, but I have to say it. Just because the legislators are considering other laws doesn't mean they aren't also trying to do something about the backlog of permit requests. In every other debate about gun laws the backlog gets brought up, and I keep saying that it is irrelevant to those discussions. I understand people are frustrated by it, but seriously, do you need to bring it up every single time any sort of gun legislation is discussed?

Sharpshooter III Joined: Aug 01, 2011 Posts: 288

Hermes wrote:

I'll probably start a flamewar because of this comment, but I have to say it. Just because the legislators are considering other laws doesn't mean they aren't also trying to do something about the backlog of permit requests. In every other debate about gun laws the backlog gets brought up, and I keep saying that it is irrelevant to those discussions. I understand people are frustrated by it, but seriously, do you need to bring it up every single time any sort of gun legislation is discussed?

If it involves the DPS proposing to further restrict our rights while denying people their rights completely? Yes.

Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2012 1:14 pm

The two are different issues but no doubt will get joined together. I can't see this passing, some towns make it more difficult than others to get permits and would like to keep it that way.

Sharpshooter III Joined: Aug 01, 2011 Posts: 288

Hermes wrote:

and very specific time limits.

Where do you see anything of the sort in the proposed modifications?

Marksman V Joined: Dec 15, 2010 Posts: 109

Quote:

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.

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 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.

So if I'm reading these parts correctly, you are entitled to get the forms immediately in person or in one week if you request some other way (mail? phone? email? that part is ambiguous). In fact, if they don't give you the form, your request for the form becomes "sufficient application", at which point the 8 week timer from part (c) starts. You have to be informed about the local temporary permit being approved or denied in 8 weeks, and then there's another 8 weeks for the DPS to approve, deny, or let you know that the national criminal history records check has not come back yet.

Rich_B wrote:

Hermes wrote:

and very specific time limits.

Where do you see anything of the sort in the proposed modifications?

Marksman V Joined: Dec 15, 2010 Posts: 109

Then fight both. Separately. When we're trying to discuss one topic and the other one keeps getting thrown in, all it does is muddy the waters and does not advance the discussion or change anyone's mind.

These bills are very specific in what they seek to legislate. Fight the bills specifically, addressing what the bill says, not every single thing that ever happened in the history of Connecticut firearms legislation.

Rich_B wrote:

Hermes wrote:

I'll probably start a flamewar because of this comment, but I have to say it. Just because the legislators are considering other laws doesn't mean they aren't also trying to do something about the backlog of permit requests. In every other debate about gun laws the backlog gets brought up, and I keep saying that it is irrelevant to those discussions. I understand people are frustrated by it, but seriously, do you need to bring it up every single time any sort of gun legislation is discussed?

If it involves the DPS proposing to further restrict our rights while denying people their rights completely? Yes.

Sharpshooter III Joined: Aug 01, 2011 Posts: 288

Hermes wrote:

So if I'm reading these parts correctly, you are entitled to get the forms immediately in person or in one week if you request some other way (mail? phone? email? that part is ambiguous). In fact, if they don't give you the form, your request for the form becomes "sufficient application", at which point the 8 week timer from part (c) starts. You have to be informed about the local temporary permit being approved or denied in 8 weeks, and then there's another 8 weeks for the DPS to approve, deny, or let you know that the national criminal history records check has not come back yet.

That has always been the law.

Immediate, 5 days, 1 week, 8 weeks.

Sharpshooter III Joined: Aug 01, 2011 Posts: 288

Hermes wrote:

Then fight both. Separately. When we're trying to discuss one topic and the other one keeps getting thrown in, all it does is muddy the waters and does not advance the discussion or change anyone's mind.

Correct me if I am wrong, didn't you bring that up here? Why not address it in the thread that is bothering you instead of hijacking this thread with your protest?

Marksman V Joined: Dec 15, 2010 Posts: 109

I did. It got thrown back in my face with another argument completely irrelevant to blood alcohol level while carrying.

I'm arguing here because I actually feel strongly enough about this stuff that I really hope people fight the legislation they oppose in a targeted, specific manner, which may actually help change peoples' minds.

Like I said in the other thread, I'm not going to change your mind with just words in a forum if you're already set in your ways, and I'm happy to discuss anything in person over coffee or whatever. I'll stop hijacking this thread and go back to not saying anything, since no one cares what I think anyways.

Rich_B wrote:

Hermes wrote:

The number of permits sitting unprocessed on someone's desk is completely irrelevant.

Only to people that are not waiting on their permit.

Rich_B wrote:

Hermes wrote:

Then fight both. Separately. When we're trying to discuss one topic and the other one keeps getting thrown in, all it does is muddy the waters and does not advance the discussion or change anyone's mind.

Correct me if I am wrong, didn't you bring that up here? Why not address it in the thread that is bothering you instead of hijacking this thread with your protest?