If you have a particular encounter with another citizen or LEO, post it here.
 #42722  by SCUBA9097
 
Gator - This occured years ago, back when Judges would deny you just because they didn't like the way you looked in your photo. We actually have a decent set of Judges doing the processes now, but talk to some of the people who had their licenses years ago. The Judge would often deny you for any reason he saw fit and sometimes for absolutely no reason at all.
 #42727  by stephpd
 
I didn't expect to find this argument in this thread.

I think they changed the process without changing the laws when 'shall issue' was brought up back in the 90's. Now they have to have just cause. Even the AG said as much when he declared to the citizens that OC was legal. He probably didn't intend it but statements like that got things changed. Chip's posted the complete statement and it's clear the AG was using his discretion then. That doesn't happen now, they have to find something to deny the license.

As far as criminals reading the pubic notice section to find guns to steal I've seen no evidence of it. Most folks don't even read the paper anymore. Certainly, very few read the public notice section. Nobody at work noticed when I placed my notice in the paper, and being government employees they do tend to spend work time reading the paper. That and I think the notice is only in the paper for one day.

As for references, many states have that requirement.
 #42728  by bluedog46
 
GatorDude wrote:
SCUBA9097 wrote:Quite a few years ago, there was a woman and a man who called in to "voice their concerns" on every notice that was run in the paper. I believe that in the end, once the state caught on to what was happening, they each were charged with quite a few counts of filing a false report or something similiar. Now the state does a little more investigating into these "John Doe shouldn't be able to carry" reports to flesh out if it's just a nutjob, jealous ex, etc.
And that's exactly what should happen. It provides potentially relevant information that deserves further investigation and inquiry. If unfounded, it should not be an issue. I do not believe such a complaint or report would be legally sufficicent to deny a CCDW permit unless the information was corroborated or verified, etc.
I ll agree 100% in this case. There are some people who should not own guns in some cases.
 #42732  by astro_wanabe
 
bluedog46 wrote:I ll agree 100% in this case. There are some people who should not own guns in some cases.
Except we aren't discussing whether or not you can OWN a firearm, but whether or not somebody who is legally able to own one can CARRY it. If you are legal enough to own the firearm, then I have no business telling you what you can and can't do with it as long as you aren't threatening anyone and aren't on my property. There's no need for CCDWs at all. Especially since someone who can legally own the firearm but is denied a CCDW can still carry via OC - so the whole application and denial process is pointless. And if you can't legally own a firearm, then I doubt you're bothering with the CCDW process before carrying meaning the process isn't stopping you and only tends to bother the law-abiding.

Even when a criminal is charged with a concealed carry violation it seems to always be in addition to a laundry list of other charges. It seems the primary use of the law is to "throw the book" at criminals, and hope you have enough charges that something sticks.
 #42751  by wwd
 
SCUBA9097 wrote:Quite a few years ago, there was a woman and a man who called in to "voice their concerns" on every notice that was run in the paper.
Doesn't that just make you want to track 'em down, take 'em out back, and just slap them around a little? ( or a lot!) :sparring:
 #42752  by GatorDude
 
wwd wrote:
SCUBA9097 wrote:Quite a few years ago, there was a woman and a man who called in to "voice their concerns" on every notice that was run in the paper.
Doesn't that just make you want to track 'em down, take 'em out back, and just slap them around a little? ( or a lot!) :sparring:
At least you didn't say "shoot them"..... :lol: :roll: ;)
 #42760  by bluedog46
 
GatorDude wrote:
wwd wrote:
SCUBA9097 wrote:Quite a few years ago, there was a woman and a man who called in to "voice their concerns" on every notice that was run in the paper.
Doesn't that just make you want to track 'em down, take 'em out back, and just slap them around a little? ( or a lot!) :sparring:
At least you didn't say "shoot them"..... :lol: :roll: ;)

Of course not. Save the rough stuff for politicians that try to infringe on our rights. We are in a state with plenty.

that is a joke. I dont advocate violence except in self defense
  • 1
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10