New Canaan CT will no longer issue temporary state pistol permits.

Status
Not open for further replies.
desidog

desidog

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
2,595
NEW CANAAN - New Canaan's police chief announced today his department will no longer issue temporary state pistol permits.
Chief Leon Krolikowski says his department recently confirmed local police departments do not have access to the State of Connecticut's mental health data base.
He says that means the department cannot determine if someone applying for a 60 day permit has a mental condition that would prohibit them from owning a gun.
The chief called on Gov. Dannel Malloy to address the issue and says his department will not issue temporary pistol licenses until it is.
Click to expand...

From News 12 CT

I don't know if the Chief is pro or anti; but this is an interesting development. It is definitely an infringement on sane New Canaan residents rights to keep and bear arms.

I'm not crazy, and I do think that the Chief has a sensible point; and, hopefully, this could erode the idiotic new CT gun laws... however, knowing the political climate in this state, i doubt it will. Suggestions on where this will go?
 
Does the law explicitly state that he must access those mental health records in order to approve a permit, or is he just using 'executive fiat' to impose his personal prejudice and deny all permits?
 
Guilty until proven innocent. That's very clearly spelled out in the "Constitution According To Bloomberg". :cuss:
 
CT is a "Shall Issue" state when it comes to permits. I look forward to seeing how this plays out
 
The temporary permit is issued until the "real" permit arrives. You get it after you jump thru the hoops and before the hard copy photo ID is issued. This is an inconvenience but does not prevent you from getting your permit. I think mine took 4-5 weeks.
 
Last edited:
Great!

The old: "Neither you nor I can actually tell that you're disallowed - so - you are disallowed!"

How long before a sanity ID is necessary.

Prove you're not a fellon.
Prove you're not unstable.
Prove you're not unreliably medicated.
Prove that no one in your home is any of the above.


Prove, prove, prove...

Kafka - thy name is...

Prove that the U.S. Constitution applies to you... well, after being filtered through our ever shifting criteria and if we can/wish to get around to it.

Todd.
 
It's a good thing for New Canaan that they are a very very wealthy town. They're going to have a very expensive legal battle on their hands if this doesn't get resolved post haste.
 
Did the police chief ever stop to think that if somebody wanted a gun for nefarious reasons, they probably wouldn't get it through legal channels to begin with? It's a short ride to Bridgeport to get a hot piece. This is a great example of infringement on already restricted rights.

Is he going to put a hold on driver's licenses until they can verify that you aren't an alcoholic?
 
Sounds like the NRA has an opportunity to start some legal or lobbying procedures. Be nice if ACLU saw this as a discrimination issue. But thats a long shot.
It is a rich area, maybe some rich guy or the state organization will start legal action.
Our state organization has been very successful in defeating local arbitrary decision as we have a preemtion law that prohibits local goverment from imposing restriction on state law.
 
"Is he going to put a hold on driver's licenses until they can verify that you aren't an alcoholic?"

I love it!!! This is the big question I always ask, but never get an answer to!
 
Since when did criminals ever obey the law, if they did they wouldn't be criminals. And who defines the definition of mentally ill? I bet you could twist the definition of that one way or another to cover the entire world's population including those doing the defining. Just my opinion though.
 
I see a lot of comments indicating that the police chief is anti-gun. That may or may not be true but my impression is that he's just trying to CYA. I don't know CT law and I don't know if he can be held liable if he issues a permit that shouldn't have been issued. If that were the case I wouldn't issue it either if I didn't have access to ALL of the relevant information. As I understand from other posts here, it doesn't affect receipt of your regular state permit at all. I could be wrong and he could be rabidly anti-gun and just using this as an excuse to avoid doing his job but if he can be held liable for wrongly issuing a permit then he has a valid reason to withhold them.
 
You have to obtain a temporary permit to carry through the town or city you live in before you get your state permit. He has since reversed his ruling as the chief can call the state police and run a candidate through the states mental health database.

What is ridiculous is that you cannot even buy a gun with a temporary permit that the town chief gives you. You have to bring that temporary permit to the state police and get your regular state pistol permit before you can buy guns in CT. His stance was a political move to stonewall pistol permit candidates by twisting the law as he sees fit. The chief has a huge amount of pull when it comes to getting your permit. And the pistol permit state Board is a long arduous process should you challenge any part of the process.
 
You do not need a permit to possess in CT, only to carry. Many households have handguns. A mentally ill person probably would not need a permit to obtain a weapon, lots of homes just have them.

The anti gun people are no doubt in rapture over last years gun law debacle. This may just be the next step in the further erosion of gun rights in CT.

It's my belief that police chiefs and commissioners must tow the political line to keep their jobs. This is no doubt an example of this process.
 
IMHO: The Chief is doing exactly the right thing (within the paradigm of the law as written in CT).

Follow for comprehension:



1: CT residents have the option to apply locally for a 60 day temporary CCW issued by the town, and issued more rapidly than the state, to be used while their permanent CCW is in process. Nice, huh? I wish Florida and Wisconsin did that. It's a way to avoid the 4-6 week wait wait while the permanent CCW is issued (which is a "shall issue" permit, by the way). This permit process is a convenience. This is a *good* thing for CT residents.

2: CT law requires that all applicants be run thru the database checks to see if they have been ajudicated a mental defective. That's the law, like it or not. And it's the law no matter if the Chief likes it or not.

3: For privacy reasons, the mental health database is not accessable to local authorities. From a protection of personal information standpoint this is likely a good thing too. You really want the clerk at the town hall casually looking thru your mental health records?

4: So, here's the unintended consequence: Although the Chief has the legal authority to issue these "convenience" temporary permits, there's no way he can himself comply locally with the requirement to do the mental health check....


ergo:

He cannot issue them under the law as written without access to the mental health database. Which is not a bad thing when you *really* think about the privacy issues residing in that database. Do you *really* want the mental health database to be accessable to your local cops?


Ask yourself: If *you* were the Chief of Police in a town just a few towns over from where the Sandy Hook shooting took place, would *you* issue CCW's to people who walk in and want them *now* when doing so would result in people carrying handguns based on your signature without having run them thru the mental health database check required by law?

I sure wouldn't.


"He has since reversed his ruling as the chief can call the state police and run a candidate through the states mental health database."

In the end it looks like he's figured out a workaround, by getting the state police to assist that check for him, and so... that is that. Seems like not a lack of desire, but rather a lack of available process.



"Sounds like the NRA has an opportunity to start some legal or lobbying procedures."

What should they do? Sue the town for following the law? Uhh..... <sigh>...




Willie

.
 
Last edited:
What I don't understand is why not enough gun owners in Conn. belong to the NRA or a state gun organization to support a lawsuit each and every time these issues come up. I do see a lot of gun owners bitch and moan on these web forums but I don't see the money and support where it counts. Just as has happened in Mass. and Conn. gun owner rights are eroded bit by bit and then they wonder why or how it happened. It happened because the gun owners allowed it to happen. Such will be the case in every state until gun owners wake up and learn that they have to put up money, time and effort to give the 2nd Amendment the teeth it requires to be recognized by the bureaucrats and politicians who run the states.
Only 3% of Americans got this country founded; where are the 3% today?
 
^^^
The CCDL (Conn. Citizen's Defense League) has a very strong membership. How do you know who is and isn't donating money? We have CCDL with some assistance of the NRA fighting our cause here.
Did you know that we have already had oral arguments (last month) at the local Federal Court of Appeals in re: the firearms legislation? We were defeated in the local court last year, went to appeal, and had arguments last month. We're still awaiting the Judge's ruling. That is our second round in the ring with the anti-gunners since our new AWB was passed.

I think there is perhaps a misconception that because we are getting beaten, that we aren't fighting. We most certainly are. But Gov. Malloy, and his very powerful anti-gun backers are a committed and formidable foe. That, and the fact that the pro-gunners in this state are outnumbered, and fighting the uphill battle against the momentum of the Sandy Hook shooting. We were actually doing pretty well until Sandy Hook, and then the pendulum swung in the other direction. It is a heavy pendulum and getting it to stop and swing back is taking very very serious effort.
 
I bet the Chief is doing one of two thing -

1) Give the CLEO access to the same information the State uses to issue permits or he's not issuing any type of permit. Equal standing is needed if that responsibility is going to fall to the CLEO.

2) The department and community are not taking on the liability of issuing a temporary permit if they can't get access to the database that would let them know someone was prohibited. All it takes is one crazy like Lanza to be issued a temp permit to bankrupt the town.
 
^^ Precisely.

Looks like he used his press release to put some pressure on the State Police to run the checks he can't run for himself. Looks like the gambit worked.

Sounds, to me, like he's on the ball.


Willie

.
 
Gaffer said:
What I don't understand is why not enough gun owners in Conn. belong to the NRA or a state gun organization to support a lawsuit each and every time these issues come up. I do see a lot of gun owners bitch and moan on these web forums but I don't see the money and support where it counts. Just as has happened in Mass. and Conn. gun owner rights are eroded bit by bit and then they wonder why or how it happened. It happened because the gun owners allowed it to happen. Such will be the case in every state until gun owners wake up and learn that they have to put up money, time and effort to give the 2nd Amendment the teeth it requires to be recognized by the bureaucrats and politicians who run the states.
Only 3% of Americans got this country founded; where are the 3% today?
Click to expand...
CCDL has done, and is doing everything possible in what will be a long battle. My perception as a CT gun owner is that the NRA was and is not present in this process. Maybe I'm wrong on this, but I viewed CT as a battleground that required a big NRA presence, and I never saw them as actively involved.

At least this Police Chief is looking at the root cause of many "mass shooting" events, mental illness. Our Governor and his suck up legislature has not and is not working on the mental illness issues
 
Last edited:
Willie Sutton said:
IMHO: The Chief is doing exactly the right thing (within the paradigm of the law as written in CT).

Follow for comprehension:



1: CT residents have the option to apply locally for a 60 day temporary CCW issued by the town, and issued more rapidly than the state, to be used while their permanent CCW is in process. Nice, huh? I wish Florida and Wisconsin did that. It's a way to avoid the 4-6 week wait wait while the permanent CCW is issued (which is a "shall issue" permit, by the way). This permit process is a convenience. This is a *good* thing for CT residents.

2: CT law requires that all applicants be run thru the database checks to see if they have been ajudicated a mental defective. That's the law, like it or not. And it's the law no matter if the Chief likes it or not.

3: For privacy reasons, the mental health database is not accessable to local authorities. From a protection of personal information standpoint this is likely a good thing too. You really want the clerk at the town hall casually looking thru your mental health records?

4: So, here's the unintended consequence: Although the Chief has the legal authority to issue these "convenience" temporary permits, there's no way he can himself comply locally with the requirement to do the mental health check....


ergo:

He cannot issue them under the law as written without access to the mental health database. Which is not a bad thing when you *really* think about the privacy issues residing in that database. Do you *really* want the mental health database to be accessable to your local cops?


Ask yourself: If *you* were the Chief of Police in a town just a few towns over from where the Sandy Hook shooting took place, would *you* issue CCW's to people who walk in and want them *now* when doing so would result in people carrying handguns based on your signature without having run them thru the mental health database check required by law?

I sure wouldn't.


"He has since reversed his ruling as the chief can call the state police and run a candidate through the states mental health database."

In the end it looks like he's figured out a workaround, by getting the state police to assist that check for him, and so... that is that. Seems like not a lack of desire, but rather a lack of available process.



"Sounds like the NRA has an opportunity to start some legal or lobbying procedures."

What should they do? Sue the town for following the law? Uhh..... <sigh>...




Willie

.
Click to expand...
Can you provide the language in the law that says you must be run through the mental health database? I cannot seem to find it in the CT general statutes.
 
Maybe DESPP should send a few folks up to New Hampshire to figure out how they manage to issue resident permits in less than ten business days. :rolleyes:

In all seriousness, the entire issue would go away if CT could issue permits in a more timely manner.
 
"CCDL has done, and is doing everything possible in what will be a long battle. My perception as a CT gun owner is that the NRA was and is not present in this process. Maybe I'm wrong on this, but I viewed CT as a battleground that required a big NRA presence, and I never saw them as actively involved."


The NRA has basically written off areas of the USA where it seems that no good can come from their efforts. I was actively involved for decades in the New Jersey RKBA activist arena, and we never gained any assistance from the NRA. Basically, the NRA looks at the national balance of power and puts work into places that might be contestable. There was no contest to be won in NJ, and essentially the NRA walked off and spent their money elsewhere. Ditto many of the other anti-RKBA states. Connecticut as a battleground state took them by surprise, methinks.



"At least this Police Chief is looking at the root cause of many "mass shooting" events, mental illness. Our Governor and his suck up legislature has not and is not working on the mental illness issues"

Right on, and we should absolutely support these efforts. Seems like he got what's good for him, his town, and us as a result of the way he played the system to put pressure on the State Police.



"Maybe DESPP should send a few folks up to New Hampshire to figure out how they manage to issue resident permits in less than ten business days. In all seriousness, the entire issue would go away if CT could issue permits in a more timely manner"

Take a look at the numbers of residents and you'll see why. Not to defend CT, but every state 've ever gotten a permit from has had processing times of 4-8 weeks. NH stands out as suoperior, but CT does not stand out as inferior in any way. The combination of an average processing time with a law permitting a local authority to process a temporary "while you wait" (if he so chooses in time of elergency) is actually pretty darned good.



Can you provide the language in the law that says you must be run through the mental health database? I cannot seem to find it in the CT general statutes.

Shoot a note to one of the CT activists here and I'm sure they will have the info. I'm sitting in the desert waiting to fly and have other things to do than to research the statutes. Steve CT? You know?




Willie

.
 
For an eastern state, VT stands out at the top. No permit required to carry. Amazingly, there's no carnage in the streets. Must be something in the water up there.
 
First off, this question has been resolved and NCPD is back to issuing permits.

I don't have the exact verbiage at hand, but in CT the local PD (or State Police) process the application for Carry Permits, they are responsible to check for criminal background, and they evaluate other factors. In my case they contacted my employer, and they may have interviewed my neighbors.

There are procedures in place for PD's to check for mental health issues, it's not clear why this guy had a problem
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

3
  • Locked
Hartford Courant on CT State Police's Dysfunctional Gun Permit Unit
Replies
17
Views
1K
romma
R
W
  • Locked
Sacramento Sheriff cracking down on gun permits
Replies
19
Views
2K
jrfoxx
J
M
  • Locked
Mich. Police Get Bigger Pistols
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
Schiessuebung
S
J
  • Locked
Police chief should take care of his own guns before regulating everyone elses.
Replies
24
Views
2K
Dain Bramage
Dain Bramage
N
  • Locked
CT- Recourse if temporary/local permit not issued in time?
Replies
4
Views
344
N003k
N
Back
Top