| Author | Post |
|---|
Edward Peruta
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 3rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 386 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon May 18th, 2009 12:40 pm |
|
This response is alleged to have been sent out by a member of the Department of Public Safety Special License and Firearms Unit.
TEXT OF EMAIL:
Hello, Thank you for the question. Please note that this is not legal advice and should not be relied on as such based on the general nature of your question with respect to carrying of handguns. As an initial matter, you are right about Connecticut General Statute sec. 29-28 being explicitly silent with respect to "concealed". The "carry" statute only addresses the carrying of handguns and does not address the manner/way/location in which they must be carried. However, numerous other statutes come into play with how, when, and where you can carry.
The analogy is a motor vehicle license...yes you have a license to drive under the statute, but many other statutes are in place as to how, when, and where you can drive.
We strongly suggest you consult an attorney to discuss specific carry situation to flesh out your understanding. It might be appropriate to discuss concepts with that attorney related to, for example, the "contemporary community standard" as to the public at large (in the place of carry) as to when, where, and how they expect to see handguns being carried. As you can imagine a situation where someone was carrying a handgun in their hand while at a movie theater would be different from that same situation at the gun range.
All the best,
Tpr. Hatfield
Special Licensing and Firearms Unit
1111 Country Club Road, Middletown, CT
I'm going to ask what these "other statutes" are regarding "manner/way/location" of carrying.
TO ALL WHO READ THIS POST:
I'd like to thank the individual who supplied me with this recent response from Trooper Hatfield Esq..
This response together with SEVERAL PREVIOUSLY OFFERED RESPONSES on this topic offers another glimpse into how the Department of Public Safety interprets, administers and enforces the laws together with how they looks at situations involving firearms.
As a DPS certified/recognized instructor, I believe that a clear and concise statement should be offered to every valid question posed by permit holders and the general public regarding the carrying of firearms by VALID PERMIT HOLDERS who have attended and passed an approved DPS course of instruction.
I for one have started to carry my weapon openly most of the time and have not been surprised by the questions that I have been asked.
I believe that law enforcement in general have failed to understand the law and incorrectly informed citizens of Connecticut regarding the laws pertaining to pistol permits and the open or concealed question.
Without question, if you carry your weapon in your hand rather than in a holster, you are going to find yourself in a situation. What Trooper Hatfield deliberately failed to state was that carrying an exposed holstered pistol or revolver while in possession of a valid permit to do so, by itself is NOT a crime.
Having had a case involving an individuals concept of a "contemporary community standard", I can tell you that it is not determined by one person or a small group of individuals.
In my case, Federal Judge Stephan Underhill asked "Who determined the Community Standard", and found in my favor after the individual responded by stating "I did".
Law enforcement and certified DPS/NRA instructors in Connecticut have failed to properly train prospective permit holders in the law, and have by their incompetence created a false belief that pistols and revolvers must be concealed.
It is also quite evident but not surprising that Trooper Hatfield conveniently left out the fact that the issue was presented to the Connecticut State Legislature without success.
As a DPS certified instructor, I will present my issues directly to the DPS so that I do not present or offer incorrect information to those who seek to have me instruct them in preparation to submit a permit application to carry a pistol or revolver.
Suggestion:
Google “Contemporary Community Standards” and you will find many cases on topics regarding PORNOGRAPHY, THE INTERNET and the FIRST AMENDMENT.
Given the fact that DPS attempted in 2008 and again in 2009 to have the issue addressed and mandated by the legislature failed, seems obvious that our elected Connecticut officials chose to leave our “Contemporary Community Standard” as it currently exists.
Having participated as a plaintiff in a case before a Federal Judge, I am very aware of the fact that that lat east one judge found it necessary to ask and individual on the witness stand "who decided the community standard?” The witness replied that he had made the decision, and the judge rendered his decision against the individual and Cox Communications.
This issue is no surprise, DPS is looking everywhere and anywhere they can to justify their actions or statements.
You might also ask this question – What community are we talking about, the world community, our national community, the Connecticut community or a county or local community.
Any attempt to enforce a community standard based on existing accepted activities in local communities would lead to a patchwork of different laws and interpretations.
You might also consider the fact that our Constitution and Laws established by our State Legislature establish our statewide community standards. NOT A HANDFUL OF POLICE OFFICERS WHO ANSWER EMAIL QUESTIONS.
Examples of "Contemporary Community Standards"
History tells us that owning slaves in Connecticut was at one time an established "Contemporary Community Standard"
History tells us that prohibiting blacks from eating at "Whites only" lunch counters was an established "Contemporary Community Standard"
History tells us that segregating students by race and geographical location was an established "Contemporary Community Standard"
History tells us that the immediate seizure of driver's licenses from intoxicated individuals without legislation to do so was a "Contemporary Community Standard"
Currently you will find SPEEDING, DRIVING WITHOUT A SEAT-BELT, TALKING ON A CELL PHONE, OPERATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE AND MINORS OBTAINING AND CONSUMING ALCOHOL as well established "Contemporary Community Standards" practiced by vast number of individuals in Connecticut.
The Department of Public Safety considers themselves a 'COMMUNITY' and has always attempted to impose their standards on the general public and when asked to justify their actions, respond with "BECAUSE WE SAY SO".
Contemporary community standards in Connecticut are clearly established in the General Statutes, which in parts, limit the power and authority of Law Enforcement Agencies including the Department of Public Safety.
To offer another ambiguous public response to a valid question is reckless, confusing and improper on the part of DPS.
|
Lenny Benedetto
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon May 18th, 2009 04:47 pm |
|
ED.
As you stated and I quote
"Law enforcement and certified DPS/NRA instructors in Connecticut have failed to properly train prospective permit holders in the law, and have by their incompetence created a false belief that pistols and revolvers must be concealed."
Having had my permit to carry for more years than I care to remember, I do not remember what I was taught about open carry, however my wife just took her NRA basic handgun course about 6 months ago and the instructor made it very clear to her class that they only carry CONCEALED!
This class was taught in CT and there was no discussion about the laws, and how it is perfectly LEGAL to open carry in CT.
I agree with you about their incompetence and the poor quality of service that they are supplying to these students about the laws involved with carrying a handgun.
|
Edward Peruta
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 3rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 386 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon May 18th, 2009 05:34 pm |
|
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 12:17 PM
To: Doug. Hall
Cc:
Subject: Specific Question on carrying pistols or revovers openly or concealed
Sgt. Hall,
I have recently been provided with an email regarding openly carrying pistols or revolvers over the signature of Trooper Hatfield Esq. of your department.
To say that I am confused in an understatement. I am now in possession of at least four different answers to what seems to be the same questions!!
Therefore this email is my official request regarding the legal right to carry a pistol or revolver openly in the State of Connecticut.
As you know, I possess a valid Connecticut Permit to Carry Pistols and Revolvers, and am currently certified by DPS as a pistol safety course instructor and am the author of an approved course of instruction by the Connecticut Department of Public Safety.
I am currently carrying my weapon openly while in possession of my valid permit and have been approached by several individuals who have asked questions regarding my carrying openly.
My response to those that ask for my opinion is as follows:
I immediately provide the individual with the fact that I possess a valid permit to carry my firearm.
I then identify myself as DPS certified instructor and inform the individual that I am familiar with the laws regarding permits to carry pistols and revolvers in Connecticut.
If needed, I then go on to explain that there is currently no mandate to conceal a carried pistol or revolver by those in possession of a valid permit to do so.
I acknowledge and explain to any individual that asks, that carrying a pistol or revolver openly may cause individuals unfamiliar with state law to report an openly carried firearm to members of law enforcecement.
If necessary, I personally offer the individual an opportunity to summon a member of law enforcement for an official response to any concerns they may have.
As a permit holder and instructor, I am aware that one or more members of law enforcement, (in the performance of their duties), may respond to the call and confront any individual who is carrying a pistol or revolver, including the undersigned permit holder/instructor.
As an individual, permit holder and instructor, I accept the fact that law enforcement personnel, (for their own safety), will more than likely take precautions to insure their safety during any interaction with a person carrying a pistol or revolver regardless of the facts.
As an individual, permit holder and instructor I understand that law enforcement personnel may require that a valid permit to carry pistols and revolvers be produced during any interaction.
As an individual, permit holder and instructor it is my belief that in the absence of verifiable allegations of intent to cause alarm, the valid permit and pistol or revolver should be promptly returned, and the individual allowed to continue about their business without any further law enforcement action.
Given the obvious ambiguity and differing opinions that exist in the minds of citizens, permit holders and members of law enforcement on this topic, I am compelled to seek a simple direct answer to the basic questions surrounding the right to carry openly and/or concealed.
The question posed by this email:
Given the fact that concealment of a pistol or revolver is NOT specifically mandated by Connecticut law, I am compelled to request an answer to the following question.
QUESTION
May an individual who is in possession of a VALID PERMIT to carry pistols or revolvers carry their pistol or revolver holstered and exposed without fear of being arrested or having their permit or weapon confiscated or seized by members of law enforcement?
YES OR NO
|
Lenny Benedetto
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon May 18th, 2009 05:48 pm |
|
I can hardly wait for the answer. Even though I suspect that there will no such answer coming soon.
|
Edward Peruta
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 3rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 386 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon May 18th, 2009 05:57 pm |
|
I went down and spoke to Sgt. Hall this morning and brought this situation to his attemtion.
Sgt. Hall advised that the way the question was posed is why the recent answer said what it did.
I suggested and Sgt. Hall agreed that if I pose a properly worded question that I would get an answer. He also stated that the question and DPS response would be submitted to higher authority.
This confusion needs to end with a simple yes or no answer to a very straight forward question.
I am now carrying openly on a regular basis unless I'm in a situation where carrying is NOT permitted.
I personally perfer to carry concealed, but will only do so when and after the proper response to the question is made public by DPS.
Ed Peruta
|
Lenny Benedetto
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon May 18th, 2009 06:10 pm |
|
Ed
I commend you on the stance that you are taking. Especially since you prefer to CC.
The question will be sent to the higher authorities and if it was anyone else posing the question to them it would filed in the trash.
I know with you pushing for the answer they will not be able to duck this issue for much longer!!!!
Keep fighting the good fight!!!
Thank You
|
romma
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri May 22nd, 2009 04:05 pm |
|
I also can hardly wait... The walls are closing in on th DPS with regards, and there are only so many corners to try to hide in.
|
AWDstylez
Banned
| Joined: | Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 2715 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri May 22nd, 2009 09:54 pm |
|
| Thanks for all the time, effort, and expendature Ed. The rest of us are forever grateful that you're willing to do what many of us don't have the time or resources to do.
|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Tue May 26th, 2009 01:16 am |
|
| What relevant criminal statute incorporates a "contemporary community standard" hegre? I bet, none. this is BS.
|
Edward Peruta
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 3rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 386 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 26th, 2009 02:27 am |
|
To Mike,
There is NO provision in Connecticut Law regarding Contemporary Community Standards. The phrase is more towards pornography than carrying a firearm.
The beauty of the internet is that you can do a word or phrase search and see where it is used most frequently.
This phrase as used by the Connecticut Department of Public Safety goes a long way to expressing their mental attitude towards those that have permits and carry openly.
It's just another bump in the road by a person with authority.
What we need to do is share our experiences and correspondence with each other to keep track of what's going on.
|
LQM
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue May 26th, 2009 05:44 pm |
|
Regarding the "Contemporary Community Standard," I am convinced it holds sway within the DPS alone. I just returned after renewing my permit. I was there almost ninety minutes, for a total of twelve minutes of face time at the window. The entire time there, various officers would walk by the line and with obvious disdain looked at the line almost as a nuisance. I'll chalk that up to 'public sector' attitudes that most public employees have. Not all, but most do. (Flame on!)
I wanted to question the birth certificate requirement, and the fact that a government regulatory agency does not take cash, but decided against it as my time on that line would be increased considerably if I did. I have other things to do.
Just my .02 cents
javascript:emoticon(' ',%20'images/emoticons/banana.gif')
|
Sonora Rebel
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue May 26th, 2009 08:10 pm |
|
| Rights do not require permit or license. Rights are not negotiable or renewable.
|
Edward Peruta
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 3rd, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 386 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue May 26th, 2009 09:32 pm |
|
LQM wrote: Regarding the "Contemporary Community Standard," I am convinced it holds sway within the DPS alone. I just returned after renewing my permit. I was there almost ninety minutes, for a total of twelve minutes of face time at the window. The entire time there, various officers would walk by the line and with obvious disdain looked at the line almost as a nuisance. I'll chalk that up to 'public sector' attitudes that most public employees have. Not all, but most do. (Flame on!)
I wanted to question the birth certificate requirement, and the fact that a government regulatory agency does not take cash, but decided against it as my time on that line would be increased considerably if I did. I have other things to do.
Just my .02 cents
javascript:emoticon('',%20'images/emoticons/banana.gif')
The question about Passports, Birth Certificates or Voter's Registration is currently on appeal to the Second District Court of Appeals in New York, and a new request to the Commissioner of Public Safety on the issue is being drafted at this time.
The question of why a current permit holder must present one of these three documents is questionable at best.
We'll see where it goes.
As to Contemporary Community Standards, we will also adress this issue if it becomes some type of policy.
Thanks for your interest and the comments.
Ed Peruta
|
uskrusader
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed May 27th, 2009 06:26 pm |
|
Great Thread, I OC all around my neighbourhood now. I am increasingly encouraged by this website to OC wherever I can.
Courage building 
|
romma
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed May 27th, 2009 06:37 pm |
|
Hey Jay, how are you out there? Those were some incredible pics from the helicopter.
|
Lank
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Aug 31st, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 55 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 3rd, 2009 12:31 am |
|
Fantastic work!
A "contemporary community standard" doesn't apply to carrying a gun. DPS SLFU may not *like* it, but open carrying is legal and that's the way the legislature decided it should be. Agencies like the DPS are responsible for enforcing laws, not making them. There are very good reasons why we keep the law-makers and the law-enforcers mutually exclusive in this country.
I don't really think its right for the SLFU to be responding to emails with misleading answers like the one posted. If they don't know how to answer a question correctly, they should just say that they don't know.
--- (edit) ---
Also when I got my pistol permit I was explicitly told that the pistol must be concealed at all times, and that I could be arrested for printing.
Last edited on Wed Jun 3rd, 2009 12:34 am by Lank
|
atrule
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 10th, 2009 |
| Location: | Wallingford, USA |
| Posts: | 20 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 04:01 am |
|
Hello All,
I am new to gun ownership. My interest is to encourage my friends and neighbors to be responsible gun owners like I desided to become. I also believe that OC is benificial to deteriorate the social stigma of firearms. For years I supported gun rights, but didn't do much practical gun ownership. Therefore, I call myself a pencilneck gun supporter (I hope I am over that now; if not, getting over it).
Anyway, suppose, for a moment, that this idea of a "contemporary community standard" is valid. What do we do to change it? I have said to friends that we should OC, but do so in familiar territories first. Move the line slowly. I suppose we should start a new thread about stratagies on that.
Any thoughts?
|
romma
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 04:29 am |
|
| Welcome to OC atrule! A number of members here that post in the CT forum belong to CCDL. It is a new organization that hopes to have an open carry march, or clean up day soon. Our thoughts are to invite the media to cover it, like many before us in other States have done. Join our Face Book Page at http://www.ccdl.us and welcome here, this is a great place!
|
atrule
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 10th, 2009 |
| Location: | Wallingford, USA |
| Posts: | 20 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 04:36 am |
|
Actually, I joined it a couple days ago. I wanted to go to the last meeting on Tuesday, and was looking for info on where it was to be held. Sigh, to no avail.
I would like to go to a little meetup for this.
|
Lenny Benedetto
Regular Member
| Joined: | Wed Aug 20th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 295 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 13th, 2009 05:14 am |
|
atrule welcome to the world of gun ownership and the open carry forum. Thank you for joining the facebook group and we look forward to seeing you at our next meeting. If you still need info on when and where for the meeting, please feel free to contact myself "Lenny" (one of the founding members) or any of the other people listed under officers on the facebook page. Please also remember that all are welcome so feel free to bring along all of your friends and neighbors.
|
Current time is 12:14 pm | Page: 1 2   |
|
